Dr Colm Henry, Chief Clinical Officer, HSE at a press briefing today

This afternoon.

Dr Henry said the HSE had seen an extraordinary growth of infection in the past week, beyond what even the more extreme versions of modelling would have predicted.

Dr Henry said it had not seen this level of concern since the beginning of the pandemic. The five-day rolling average was now 714, up around 100% since last week.

….If the current growth rate continued on its current trajectory, he said there would be 1,000 cases a day by the end of this month and by the end of the first week in January it could be 1,500 cases a day.

But don’t be fearful.

Or stressed.


Transmission levels of Covid-19 ‘very serious and dangerous’ – HSE

Earlier: Strainuinely

Leon Farrell/Photocall Ireland



Sponsored Link

51 thoughts on “Positive Fear

    1. SomeOldQunt

      Good. I’m glad you can’t be arsed anymore. Now you can stop posting your Gemma esque nonsense and maybe get some help

    2. benblack

      Covid exempt greetings to all. Not that Covid isn’t the biggest con in modern times……


      To all commenters – especially – and broadsheet.ie staff and proprietors, wishing you and yours a very Happy Christmas!

      Thanks Janet, SOQ, Millie, Brother, V, Charger, Millies’ Online Husband, E’Matty, f_lawless, Bodger, Chompsky, Giggidy, Papi, Micko, scottser, alick, Nick’s wonderful fab Fridays, and everyone I haven’t mentioned.

      Best Wishes.

      1. millie bobby brownie

        Thanks benblack and many happy returns to you. Hope you have a lovely Christmas, and here’s to another year where we can cheerfully tear strips off one another to pass time ;)

  1. Hank

    It’ll be A MILLION cases a day by the end of January if you don’t wise up. And it’s not out fault, it’s YOURS.
    Bold children.

  2. anolderman

    Very strange indeed. Folks have a look at the euromomo figures for deaths between 0-64. https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/
    It looks like we have never had so FEW deaths before. My graph only starts at 2015 but Q4 2020 is falling off the scale. Calm heads please. I’m not seeing the DEATHs as required for a pandemic. There is great banter here some fun some rather nasty some genuine. Such is life on the streets we walk too. Has anyone got the 2020 flu season figures?

    1. Hank

      Actually, annual deaths in 2020 are down on the last 5 year average. But sure, why would you let that get in the way of fear hysteria??

    1. E'Matty

      Interesting. Turns up in high numbers too amongst the alleged Covid deaths down south too. HSPC data reveals that 95% of individuals who died with confirmed Covid-19 infections so far also suffered from known underlying health conditions.  

      The most common underlying condition was Chronic Heart Disease, followed by Chronic Neurological diseases including Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, and Multiple Sclerosis. These were followed by Chronic Respiratory Disease, Hypertension, Cancer/malignancy, and Diabetes. Just 5% of those who died were admitted to ICU, which given Covid is very treatable, means Covid was not the primary cause of death for 95% of the Covid claimed deaths. It’s clear the aforementioned illnesses detailed above were the real causes of death, as they are every year in the elderly.

  3. ce

    “Has anyone got the 2020 flu season figures” – some lad in Westmeath had it and I saw a poorly looking horse in a field in Limerick today.

  4. bisted

    …yesterdays figure for new cases was 780…today it’s 930…recording is bound to be a bit inaccurate for the next few days…exponential growth is measured by the length of time it takes for the number of cases to double…it was 5 days…next iteration will be less…the government know this…they knew it from the model produced for the inexorable rise last time…whatever way Dr Mc Kee dresses it up it will be over 1000 tomorrow…not the end of the month…

        1. bisted

          …why do you think I would lie about a friend of mine dying just to score a point with you…I’ve told you before…Broadsheet have my contact details…they are welcome to factcheck…you…no chance…

          1. SOQ

            The only people with CoVid-19 in Daisy Hill Newry were on floor five. Floor five is where people who are too ill to go into a nursing home reside and has a long waiting list.

            Nobody outside those wards passed from CoVid-19 before or around that time- you were and are lying.

          1. SOQ

            All I am asking is whatever side of this debate you are on- please- just listen to this woman?

            Prof. Sunetra Gupta.

        2. Oro

          SOQ I think on this particular issue you should just reach out to get this fact-checked privately and stop airing it out again and again with the such recklessness. It’s really nasty. Also really undercuts your supposed compassion for others which you seem to tout regularly as part of your strategy / persona whatever you want to call it.

          I think what Millie suggested yesterday for you to do over the break is a good idea, I doubt that if you met someone in real life and they told you about a friend of theirs that died that you’d respond with “bitch please”. Remember all these commenters are real people (for the most part!).

          1. SOQ

            Passive aggression so- nope- not working.

            Now if you have issue with my opinions then by all means engage but park the personal please.

            If on the news that we are under near house arrest for another two months because of malfeasance then tough poo.

            Some of us have a lot more important thing to worry about than you feeling uncomfortable with the truth.

          2. Oro

            I’m not sure if you understand the meaning of passive aggression but I was direct and upfront. I also didn’t write anything incendiary so it was neither passive nor aggressive. It’s also not personal but I am responding to something you said, so if you think a direct response is necessarily ‘personal’ then I don’t know what to tell you.

            I think what you said was nasty. The other commenter has (at least twice) suggested that you reach out to mods to fact check but you keep dragging the circumstances of a third party’s death up every so often and making weird implications alongside it, it’s very undignified. FWIW your version of events as acquired through a nurse is at the very best unethical on the nurses part and at worst potentially illegal. However in both instances it is unreliable as it’s hearsay so it’s not the ‘gotcha’ you think it is. Your vouching for this info also suggests it’s only loosely connected with the truth (that’s my opinion which I’m not asserting as fact).

    1. E'Matty

      Pulling numbers out of their backside is all they’re doing at this stage. The numbers announced always fit the occasion on which they are seeking to ratchet up the fear again. It’s complete BS and blatant BS at that.

      1. ciaran

        Don’t forget that the Covid Cult have the want and need to believe the narrative. It’s disgusting.

  5. GiggidyGoo

    Why the change in the definition by the WHO? From a definite, to a concept, within 5 months.?
    And herd immunity, now, is achieved by protecting people from a virus? How can one be immune that way?

        1. Brother Barnabas

          soz, giggz – just a little joke

          I think the change in the text is clear evidence – nay, clear further evidence – that the liberal establishment is seeking to expand its control over our lives and impose a far-left homo regime and, accordingly, we should organise ourselves in an alt-right militia-like movement

          how about you?

    1. ReproBertie

      Hey Gig, in the text on the right there’s a link to the Director General’s briefing from October 12th. In that briefing he said:
      “Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic. It is scientifically and ethically problematic.

      First, we don’t know enough about immunity to COVID-19.

      Most people who are infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 develop an immune response within the first few weeks, but we don’t know how strong or lasting that immune response is, or how it differs for different people. We have some clues, but we don’t have the complete picture.”

      There’s more here: https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—12-october-2020

      1. SOQ

        We know enough about other Coronas to know that you develop life long immunity- so why would this one be any different?

    2. Cian

      You can read the rational in the link provided in that page (link below)

      an extract:

      There has been some discussion recently about the concept of reaching so-called “herd immunity” by letting the virus spread.

      Herd immunity is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.

      For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated.

      For polio, the threshold is about 80%.

      In other words, herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.

      Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic. It is scientifically and ethically problematic.


      1. GiggidyGoo

        No one prepared to actually put forward an explanation as to how the WHO change a ‘fact’ to a concept then?

      2. E'Matty

        Herd immunity is when a critical number of people attain immunity to a disease. It’s only now the WHO are limiting this definition to immunity achieved through vaccination. Natural immunity and immunity developed from having the disease are also valid. How the immunity is achieved is not important. That it is achieved is. The BS about never before using widespread exposure to a virus to develop herd immunity is irrelevant deflection. It doesn’t change the definition of herd immunity. We have never used lockdowns to fight a pandemic. We’ve also never quarantined the healthy to fight a pandemic or any virus.

        This is reminiscent of the WHO changing and lowering the threshold for the definition of a pandemic, just before they announced H1N1 as a global pandemic. This global pandemic never manifested and a Council of Europe investigation found National governments, WHO, and EU agencies had all been guilty of actions that led to a “waste of large sums of public money, and unjustified scares and fears about the health risks faced by the European public,” says the report. The WHO’s announcement on 11 June 2009 that H1N1 was a pandemic event was the first official pandemic declaration in over 40 years. The Council of Europe challenged the undue level of influence Big Pharma held in the WHO and National bodies such as the UKs SAGE.

        Tony Holohan told the Irish people to get their kids vaccinated with the Pandemrix vaccine (for H1N1) even two years after issues around narcolepsy were internationally well known. The same gangsters still running the show, creating hysteria with false inflation of virus threats and the usual promotion of the Big Pharma solution.

  6. Just Sayin

    “Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak”

    Yes that’s true if you really want to insist that herd immunity is not a “strategy”.

    It isn’t a strategy, because that would imply we can use it or some alternate strategy.

    Herd immunity is not a strategy, it simply exists.

    Our strategy sometimes is to assist herd immunity by deploying a vaccine.

    Our strategy of lockdown and mask wearing is hindering herd immunity, but it will get there in the end and save us regardless of our stupidity.

    1. ReproBertie

      “Our strategy sometimes is to assist herd immunity by deploying a vaccine”

      Yes, that’s what he says in the full statement.

      1. E'Matty

        No, he seeks to deny that immunity attained through infection plays a role in the development of herd immunity. He attempts to limit the definition of herd immunity to only that which results through vaccination. It’s clear and obvious BS. Lying gangsters is what these guys are. Bought and paid for by Big Pharma, a truly criminal industry, which itself emanated from the organised crime syndicate that we know as Big Oil.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link