China Coronavirus

[Angelo]

Well can you accept that absolutely nobody has claimed that NI mortality rate will be as high in 5-6 weeks as they have been at earlier stages?

I cannot accept that absolutely nobody has claimed that as there are loads of doom merchants out there who do think we are all going to die from it.

As I have said countless times before, the next 5/6 weeks will be telling. The virus is so widespread now up north that we are going to be able to quantify to some regard of how much of a danger it is when that time has passed.

[JoG2]

The ignore function is a great yoke altogether.

For clarification though, has Angelo done 0.8% or 0.008% actual work today?

[trueblue1234]

What "experts" say masks don't work?

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-52153145

That was six months ago. Does he still believe that?

How do you explain places like New York, where cases plummeted following the state mandating the wearing of masks in public in April and where most people are actually adhering to mask wearing?

No one is saying masks alone are the panacaea. However, they've been standard practice in health care for decades to reduce the chances of staff infecting patients through exhalation of infectious droplets. Even if they're only 10% effective in reducing COVID transmission, that's still something worth pursuing, along with the social distancing, hand hygiene and so on.

You asked me for an expert who said masks don't work. There;s an expert who said it.

Here's another one.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/29/no-point-in-wearing-mask-sweden-covid/

So rather than trying to move the goalposts now, why don't you just accept that is significant difference of opinion from the "experts" on whether face masks actually work or not.

What are you on about, "moving the goalposts"?

First, most governments and public health agencies were reluctant to mandate masks for the public back in March and April because of the huge shortages at the time. Its perfectly valid to ask if the guy you posted from England still believes now what he was advocating for in April, especially given the trends in the disease and the increased availability of PPE.

Second, in that link Tegnell specifically refers to the plummeting cases in Sweden at the time (July), and Sweden was trying for herd immunity anyway. Tegnell has plenty of critics within Sweden, where cases have been far higher than its neighbours.

There's always going to be a few who go against the consensus, but you seem to be implying that the public health professionals and scientists are hopelessly confused and there are equal numbers advocating for and against mask wearing. That is not the case.

The absolute effectiveness can only be established through study and experimentation. In the meantime, the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution, use what we do know about airborne transmission and masks, and recommend/require their use, along with social distancing and the rest.

It's quite clear, you asked for an expert who disputed masks - I gave you one. You then moved the goalposts to say he changed his mind.

It's perfectly valid in your mind but that's also a subjective view that supports your argument and is not based on anything more than that.

There are plenty of experts who argue that masks are ineffective. The bottom line is that it's a minor inconvenience for most people to wear them so on the small chance they do slow it down experts recommend them but that doesn't mean they are an effective weapon against the virus as the experts are at odds on this - contrary to your wrongly asserted view as I have shown.

1. I did NOT say the English dude changed his mind. I questioned if he had (which you've quoted), given that the link you posted was from April 3. We're discussing this in October. A lot has happened since then. We now have six additional months of knowledge of how the disease works and how to combat and manage it. It would be unprofessional for any scientist or public health professional not to take what happened in that time into account.

2. You haven't shown any wrongly asserted view on my part. You seem to be saying that there are a significant number of experts who advocate against masks, but you haven't shown anything to support that. Tegnell is a very noted exception in this pandemic in that he is not only not recommending masks, but he is way looser with all of the other typical requirements. He is not a typical example. Outside of Scandinavia and China (and Ireland?), most of the planet has some kind of mandatory mask rules. The science may be inconclusive at this point, but they're still correctly erring on the side of caution in their advice.

You question me on what experts said masks don't work.

I provided you with one and then you tried to move the goalposts. I also provided you with another one.

It's clear as day that experts are divided on this, which you disputed so maybe in light of factual evidence of experts publicly voicing this opinion, you should accept that there are two differing fields of thoughts between experts.

Experts will divide on most things given there will always be an outlier somewhere. However if 90% of the experts claim one thing and only 10% the other. I would tend to take my chances with the 90%.

Also just on an aside, Professor Van-Tam has changed his viewpoint on masks. This is from 2 days ago. 

<sup>Professor Jonathan Van-Tam said the best way to keep transmission low and stop the NHS being overwhelmed was for people with symptoms to self-isolate and get a test, and for people to wash their hands, wear face coverings and maintain social distancing.

He also said that the country now has much better testing capabilities, knows more about the disease, and has better treatments than during the first wave.</sup>

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-england-has-reached-a-tipping-point-similar-to-first-wave-deputy-chief-medical-officer-says-12101356

[Angelo]

What "experts" say masks don't work?

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-52153145

That was six months ago. Does he still believe that?

How do you explain places like New York, where cases plummeted following the state mandating the wearing of masks in public in April and where most people are actually adhering to mask wearing?

No one is saying masks alone are the panacaea. However, they've been standard practice in health care for decades to reduce the chances of staff infecting patients through exhalation of infectious droplets. Even if they're only 10% effective in reducing COVID transmission, that's still something worth pursuing, along with the social distancing, hand hygiene and so on.

You asked me for an expert who said masks don't work. There;s an expert who said it.

Here's another one.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/29/no-point-in-wearing-mask-sweden-covid/

So rather than trying to move the goalposts now, why don't you just accept that is significant difference of opinion from the "experts" on whether face masks actually work or not.

What are you on about, "moving the goalposts"?

First, most governments and public health agencies were reluctant to mandate masks for the public back in March and April because of the huge shortages at the time. Its perfectly valid to ask if the guy you posted from England still believes now what he was advocating for in April, especially given the trends in the disease and the increased availability of PPE.

Second, in that link Tegnell specifically refers to the plummeting cases in Sweden at the time (July), and Sweden was trying for herd immunity anyway. Tegnell has plenty of critics within Sweden, where cases have been far higher than its neighbours.

There's always going to be a few who go against the consensus, but you seem to be implying that the public health professionals and scientists are hopelessly confused and there are equal numbers advocating for and against mask wearing. That is not the case.

The absolute effectiveness can only be established through study and experimentation. In the meantime, the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution, use what we do know about airborne transmission and masks, and recommend/require their use, along with social distancing and the rest.

It's quite clear, you asked for an expert who disputed masks - I gave you one. You then moved the goalposts to say he changed his mind.

It's perfectly valid in your mind but that's also a subjective view that supports your argument and is not based on anything more than that.

There are plenty of experts who argue that masks are ineffective. The bottom line is that it's a minor inconvenience for most people to wear them so on the small chance they do slow it down experts recommend them but that doesn't mean they are an effective weapon against the virus as the experts are at odds on this - contrary to your wrongly asserted view as I have shown.

1. I did NOT say the English dude changed his mind. I questioned if he had (which you've quoted), given that the link you posted was from April 3. We're discussing this in October. A lot has happened since then. We now have six additional months of knowledge of how the disease works and how to combat and manage it. It would be unprofessional for any scientist or public health professional not to take what happened in that time into account.

2. You haven't shown any wrongly asserted view on my part. You seem to be saying that there are a significant number of experts who advocate against masks, but you haven't shown anything to support that. Tegnell is a very noted exception in this pandemic in that he is not only not recommending masks, but he is way looser with all of the other typical requirements. He is not a typical example. Outside of Scandinavia and China (and Ireland?), most of the planet has some kind of mandatory mask rules. The science may be inconclusive at this point, but they're still correctly erring on the side of caution in their advice.

You question me on what experts said masks don't work.

I provided you with one and then you tried to move the goalposts. I also provided you with another one.

It's clear as day that experts are divided on this, which you disputed so maybe in light of factual evidence of experts publicly voicing this opinion, you should accept that there are two differing fields of thoughts between experts.

Experts will divide on most things given there will always be an outlier somewhere. However if 90% of the experts claim one thing and only 10% the other. I would tend to take my chances with the 90%.

Also just on an aside, Professor Van-Tam has changed his viewpoint on masks. This is from 2 days ago. 

<sup>Professor Jonathan Van-Tam said the best way to keep transmission low and stop the NHS being overwhelmed was for people with symptoms to self-isolate and get a test, and for people to wash their hands, wear face coverings and maintain social distancing.

He also said that the country now has much better testing capabilities, knows more about the disease, and has better treatments than during the first wave.</sup>

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-england-has-reached-a-tipping-point-similar-to-first-wave-deputy-chief-medical-officer-says-12101356

I don't have any opinion either way on masks.

I wear them as they are only a minor inconvenience and if they help in any way it's not a problem but it's a classic example of how little clarity science has been able to provide thus far.

[trueblue1234]

What "experts" say masks don't work?

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-52153145

That was six months ago. Does he still believe that?

How do you explain places like New York, where cases plummeted following the state mandating the wearing of masks in public in April and where most people are actually adhering to mask wearing?

No one is saying masks alone are the panacaea. However, they've been standard practice in health care for decades to reduce the chances of staff infecting patients through exhalation of infectious droplets. Even if they're only 10% effective in reducing COVID transmission, that's still something worth pursuing, along with the social distancing, hand hygiene and so on.

You asked me for an expert who said masks don't work. There;s an expert who said it.

Here's another one.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/29/no-point-in-wearing-mask-sweden-covid/

So rather than trying to move the goalposts now, why don't you just accept that is significant difference of opinion from the "experts" on whether face masks actually work or not.

What are you on about, "moving the goalposts"?

First, most governments and public health agencies were reluctant to mandate masks for the public back in March and April because of the huge shortages at the time. Its perfectly valid to ask if the guy you posted from England still believes now what he was advocating for in April, especially given the trends in the disease and the increased availability of PPE.

Second, in that link Tegnell specifically refers to the plummeting cases in Sweden at the time (July), and Sweden was trying for herd immunity anyway. Tegnell has plenty of critics within Sweden, where cases have been far higher than its neighbours.

There's always going to be a few who go against the consensus, but you seem to be implying that the public health professionals and scientists are hopelessly confused and there are equal numbers advocating for and against mask wearing. That is not the case.

The absolute effectiveness can only be established through study and experimentation. In the meantime, the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution, use what we do know about airborne transmission and masks, and recommend/require their use, along with social distancing and the rest.

It's quite clear, you asked for an expert who disputed masks - I gave you one. You then moved the goalposts to say he changed his mind.

It's perfectly valid in your mind but that's also a subjective view that supports your argument and is not based on anything more than that.

There are plenty of experts who argue that masks are ineffective. The bottom line is that it's a minor inconvenience for most people to wear them so on the small chance they do slow it down experts recommend them but that doesn't mean they are an effective weapon against the virus as the experts are at odds on this - contrary to your wrongly asserted view as I have shown.

1. I did NOT say the English dude changed his mind. I questioned if he had (which you've quoted), given that the link you posted was from April 3. We're discussing this in October. A lot has happened since then. We now have six additional months of knowledge of how the disease works and how to combat and manage it. It would be unprofessional for any scientist or public health professional not to take what happened in that time into account.

2. You haven't shown any wrongly asserted view on my part. You seem to be saying that there are a significant number of experts who advocate against masks, but you haven't shown anything to support that. Tegnell is a very noted exception in this pandemic in that he is not only not recommending masks, but he is way looser with all of the other typical requirements. He is not a typical example. Outside of Scandinavia and China (and Ireland?), most of the planet has some kind of mandatory mask rules. The science may be inconclusive at this point, but they're still correctly erring on the side of caution in their advice.

You question me on what experts said masks don't work.

I provided you with one and then you tried to move the goalposts. I also provided you with another one.

It's clear as day that experts are divided on this, which you disputed so maybe in light of factual evidence of experts publicly voicing this opinion, you should accept that there are two differing fields of thoughts between experts.

Experts will divide on most things given there will always be an outlier somewhere. However if 90% of the experts claim one thing and only 10% the other. I would tend to take my chances with the 90%.

Also just on an aside, Professor Van-Tam has changed his viewpoint on masks. This is from 2 days ago. 

<sup>Professor Jonathan Van-Tam said the best way to keep transmission low and stop the NHS being overwhelmed was for people with symptoms to self-isolate and get a test, and for people to wash their hands, wear face coverings and maintain social distancing.

He also said that the country now has much better testing capabilities, knows more about the disease, and has better treatments than during the first wave.</sup>

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-england-has-reached-a-tipping-point-similar-to-first-wave-deputy-chief-medical-officer-says-12101356

I don't have any opinion either way on masks.

I wear them as they are only a minor inconvenience and if they help in any way it's not a problem but it's a classic example of how little clarity science has been able to provide thus far.

It depends what standard you are holding science to. Science has been working on testing, track and trace, treatment of the virus, vaccines, virus transfer data  and plenty of other things. All this doesn't happen overnight regardless of the global impact. If you were expecting experts to have all the data ready within a month or two then I think you are holding them to impossible standards and they were always doomed to fail. That's not to say they haven't made mistakes, but mistakes when you don't have the right information is understandable.

[Angelo]

What "experts" say masks don't work?

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-52153145

That was six months ago. Does he still believe that?

How do you explain places like New York, where cases plummeted following the state mandating the wearing of masks in public in April and where most people are actually adhering to mask wearing?

No one is saying masks alone are the panacaea. However, they've been standard practice in health care for decades to reduce the chances of staff infecting patients through exhalation of infectious droplets. Even if they're only 10% effective in reducing COVID transmission, that's still something worth pursuing, along with the social distancing, hand hygiene and so on.

You asked me for an expert who said masks don't work. There;s an expert who said it.

Here's another one.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/29/no-point-in-wearing-mask-sweden-covid/

So rather than trying to move the goalposts now, why don't you just accept that is significant difference of opinion from the "experts" on whether face masks actually work or not.

What are you on about, "moving the goalposts"?

First, most governments and public health agencies were reluctant to mandate masks for the public back in March and April because of the huge shortages at the time. Its perfectly valid to ask if the guy you posted from England still believes now what he was advocating for in April, especially given the trends in the disease and the increased availability of PPE.

Second, in that link Tegnell specifically refers to the plummeting cases in Sweden at the time (July), and Sweden was trying for herd immunity anyway. Tegnell has plenty of critics within Sweden, where cases have been far higher than its neighbours.

There's always going to be a few who go against the consensus, but you seem to be implying that the public health professionals and scientists are hopelessly confused and there are equal numbers advocating for and against mask wearing. That is not the case.

The absolute effectiveness can only be established through study and experimentation. In the meantime, the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution, use what we do know about airborne transmission and masks, and recommend/require their use, along with social distancing and the rest.

It's quite clear, you asked for an expert who disputed masks - I gave you one. You then moved the goalposts to say he changed his mind.

It's perfectly valid in your mind but that's also a subjective view that supports your argument and is not based on anything more than that.

There are plenty of experts who argue that masks are ineffective. The bottom line is that it's a minor inconvenience for most people to wear them so on the small chance they do slow it down experts recommend them but that doesn't mean they are an effective weapon against the virus as the experts are at odds on this - contrary to your wrongly asserted view as I have shown.

1. I did NOT say the English dude changed his mind. I questioned if he had (which you've quoted), given that the link you posted was from April 3. We're discussing this in October. A lot has happened since then. We now have six additional months of knowledge of how the disease works and how to combat and manage it. It would be unprofessional for any scientist or public health professional not to take what happened in that time into account.

2. You haven't shown any wrongly asserted view on my part. You seem to be saying that there are a significant number of experts who advocate against masks, but you haven't shown anything to support that. Tegnell is a very noted exception in this pandemic in that he is not only not recommending masks, but he is way looser with all of the other typical requirements. He is not a typical example. Outside of Scandinavia and China (and Ireland?), most of the planet has some kind of mandatory mask rules. The science may be inconclusive at this point, but they're still correctly erring on the side of caution in their advice.

You question me on what experts said masks don't work.

I provided you with one and then you tried to move the goalposts. I also provided you with another one.

It's clear as day that experts are divided on this, which you disputed so maybe in light of factual evidence of experts publicly voicing this opinion, you should accept that there are two differing fields of thoughts between experts.

Experts will divide on most things given there will always be an outlier somewhere. However if 90% of the experts claim one thing and only 10% the other. I would tend to take my chances with the 90%.

Also just on an aside, Professor Van-Tam has changed his viewpoint on masks. This is from 2 days ago. 

<sup>Professor Jonathan Van-Tam said the best way to keep transmission low and stop the NHS being overwhelmed was for people with symptoms to self-isolate and get a test, and for people to wash their hands, wear face coverings and maintain social distancing.

He also said that the country now has much better testing capabilities, knows more about the disease, and has better treatments than during the first wave.</sup>

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-england-has-reached-a-tipping-point-similar-to-first-wave-deputy-chief-medical-officer-says-12101356

I don't have any opinion either way on masks.

I wear them as they are only a minor inconvenience and if they help in any way it's not a problem but it's a classic example of how little clarity science has been able to provide thus far.

It depends what standard you are holding science to. Science has been working on testing, track and trace, treatment of the virus, vaccines, virus transfer data  and plenty of other things. All this doesn't happen overnight regardless of the global impact. If you were expecting experts to have all the data ready within a month or two then I think you are holding them to impossible standards and they were always doomed to fail. That's not to say they haven't made mistakes, but mistakes when you don't have the right information is understandable.

Yes but we're in a case where time is of the essence.

How much longer can economies sustain the pressure?
How many jobs and industry sectors are going to be wiped out?
How many people face financial hardship as result?
How long are people going to accept their liberties being restricted?

A point is going to come where a certain amount of risk is going to become acceptable because the progress science is making is very slow.

The WHO recently predicted that 10% of the world has been infected at this stage, how much of the world will have contracted it by the time scientists have made the breakthrough? Will it be of little benefit by that time?

[JoG2]

What "experts" say masks don't work?

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-52153145

That was six months ago. Does he still believe that?

How do you explain places like New York, where cases plummeted following the state mandating the wearing of masks in public in April and where most people are actually adhering to mask wearing?

No one is saying masks alone are the panacaea. However, they've been standard practice in health care for decades to reduce the chances of staff infecting patients through exhalation of infectious droplets. Even if they're only 10% effective in reducing COVID transmission, that's still something worth pursuing, along with the social distancing, hand hygiene and so on.

You asked me for an expert who said masks don't work. There;s an expert who said it.

Here's another one.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/29/no-point-in-wearing-mask-sweden-covid/

So rather than trying to move the goalposts now, why don't you just accept that is significant difference of opinion from the "experts" on whether face masks actually work or not.

What are you on about, "moving the goalposts"?

First, most governments and public health agencies were reluctant to mandate masks for the public back in March and April because of the huge shortages at the time. Its perfectly valid to ask if the guy you posted from England still believes now what he was advocating for in April, especially given the trends in the disease and the increased availability of PPE.

Second, in that link Tegnell specifically refers to the plummeting cases in Sweden at the time (July), and Sweden was trying for herd immunity anyway. Tegnell has plenty of critics within Sweden, where cases have been far higher than its neighbours.

There's always going to be a few who go against the consensus, but you seem to be implying that the public health professionals and scientists are hopelessly confused and there are equal numbers advocating for and against mask wearing. That is not the case.

The absolute effectiveness can only be established through study and experimentation. In the meantime, the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution, use what we do know about airborne transmission and masks, and recommend/require their use, along with social distancing and the rest.

It's quite clear, you asked for an expert who disputed masks - I gave you one. You then moved the goalposts to say he changed his mind.

It's perfectly valid in your mind but that's also a subjective view that supports your argument and is not based on anything more than that.

There are plenty of experts who argue that masks are ineffective. The bottom line is that it's a minor inconvenience for most people to wear them so on the small chance they do slow it down experts recommend them but that doesn't mean they are an effective weapon against the virus as the experts are at odds on this - contrary to your wrongly asserted view as I have shown.

1. I did NOT say the English dude changed his mind. I questioned if he had (which you've quoted), given that the link you posted was from April 3. We're discussing this in October. A lot has happened since then. We now have six additional months of knowledge of how the disease works and how to combat and manage it. It would be unprofessional for any scientist or public health professional not to take what happened in that time into account.

2. You haven't shown any wrongly asserted view on my part. You seem to be saying that there are a significant number of experts who advocate against masks, but you haven't shown anything to support that. Tegnell is a very noted exception in this pandemic in that he is not only not recommending masks, but he is way looser with all of the other typical requirements. He is not a typical example. Outside of Scandinavia and China (and Ireland?), most of the planet has some kind of mandatory mask rules. The science may be inconclusive at this point, but they're still correctly erring on the side of caution in their advice.

You question me on what experts said masks don't work.

I provided you with one and then you tried to move the goalposts. I also provided you with another one.

It's clear as day that experts are divided on this, which you disputed so maybe in light of factual evidence of experts publicly voicing this opinion, you should accept that there are two differing fields of thoughts between experts.

Experts will divide on most things given there will always be an outlier somewhere. However if 90% of the experts claim one thing and only 10% the other. I would tend to take my chances with the 90%.

Also just on an aside, Professor Van-Tam has changed his viewpoint on masks. This is from 2 days ago. 

<sup>Professor Jonathan Van-Tam said the best way to keep transmission low and stop the NHS being overwhelmed was for people with symptoms to self-isolate and get a test, and for people to wash their hands, wear face coverings and maintain social distancing.

He also said that the country now has much better testing capabilities, knows more about the disease, and has better treatments than during the first wave.</sup>

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-england-has-reached-a-tipping-point-similar-to-first-wave-deputy-chief-medical-officer-says-12101356

I don't have any opinion either way on masks.

I wear them as they are only a minor inconvenience and if they help in any way it's not a problem but it's a classic example of how little clarity science has been able to provide thus far.

It depends what standard you are holding science to. Science has been working on testing, track and trace, treatment of the virus, vaccines, virus transfer data  and plenty of other things. All this doesn't happen overnight regardless of the global impact. If you were expecting experts to have all the data ready within a month or two then I think you are holding them to impossible standards and they were always doomed to fail. That's not to say they haven't made mistakes, but mistakes when you don't have the right information is understandable.

Hollywood movies

[imtommygunn]

12 ICU beds left up north

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

12 ICU beds left up north

there wasnt many anyhow and they knew this in march.

altnagelvin only ever had 5
.

stormont disgrace that they never actioned that

[Milltown Row2]

This thread is turning out like another thread at the minute 

A lot of angry people losing their shit on the internet

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

This thread is turning out like another thread at the minute 

A lot of angry people losing their shit on the internet

Lol.

ok ok.

But come on there should have been some action on beds as really that seems to be crux of the whole thing. If we had the beds it would lead to lesser shutdowns, no?

[GetOverTheBar]

This thread is turning out like another thread at the minute 

A lot of angry people losing their shit on the internet

Lol.

ok ok.

But come on there should have been some action on beds as really that seems to be crux of the whole thing. If we had the beds it would lead to lesser shutdowns, no?

Too much like commons sense I'm afraid for our friends in Government.

[J70]

Anyone giving comments based on expertise will generally acknowledge the limitations. In this case, mainly down to the novelty of the virus. If they don't acknowledge the limitations, they're unprofessional. Similarly, it is unprofessional and unscientific to not change advice or comments where appropriate as more knowledge is accumulated. That is what separates science from pseudoscience like, say, evolutionary biology from creationism. That is why it is valid to ask what an expert's current opinion on COVID is, not just rely on what it was six months ago when we didn't know as much.

But is it a case of these experts changing their mind on the effectiveness of masks or acknowledging that whether it's effective or not that it's only a minor inconvenience for people to adhere to them?

I think it was not so much effectiveness as availability of masks and the growing realization of the importance of airborne transmission as a pathway. In the early days we were being told to leave our Amazon boxes outside for 24 hours to reduce the chances of surface transmission. Now, the concern is much more focused on the airborne pathway.

That the focus on airborne transmission coincided with the increasing production of cheap surgical-style masks was fortunate. Convenience of course matters as if it required some expensive equipment rather than easily-procured and cheap masks, then that would obviously be a factor in how we would proceed. If something costs 1000 euros a head, but you can't yet produce scientific papers to say it will reduce transmission by 80 or 90 or whatever percent, then you might be forced to look at other solutions. On the other hand, years of hygiene practice in hospitals and dentists shows that surgical mask use protects patients from infection, so even if we don't have hard scientific data on COVID, the sensible and cautious solution is to recommend/require them to at least capture droplets.

[sid waddell]

143 deaths announced today in the UK

Big jump

[Captain Obvious]

Seven deaths, 863 new Covid cases in Northern Ireland