Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

Seweryn

3xh wrote: »

JDD, it’s the GSK Pandemrix issue you need to review.

7-8 years later and affected people are only getting properly sorted out financially.

GSK are also attempting to make a Covid vaccine.

Yes, they are...

Regarding Pandemrix, in 2010, there were reports of narcolepsy occurring in Sweden and Finland among children who had the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. Not all the safety problems were made public.
By the end of 2009, for each one million doses of the vaccine given, about 76 cases of serious adverse events were reported though this was not made public. In Ireland, the Government kept inviting people to get vaccinated even when it was clear that the pandemic was on the wane and it was nowhere near the catastrophe portrayed by influenza researchers, governments, industry and the media. The Health Service Executive decided to purchase Pandemrix and continued to distribute it even after they knew it was dangerous and untested.

But the list of safety issues with this company is much, much longer including bribery and billions paid out in compensations because of claims over some of their drugs (including Paxil, Avandia, Zofran, etc.). Similar stories are attached to other companies that are working on the Cov. vaccine.

MelbourneMan

rob316 wrote: »

Level 3 is absolute bollox, we were told sacrifice the next 6 weeks and we can save Christmas. It's not christmas when you can't meet friends and family in a pub or restaurant or travel outside your county or mix households.

Hello.

There appears to be a misconception on your part that the restrictions are some sort of bargain between the people and those guiding actions against the spread of the pandemic. This is not the case. Restrictions must be determined according to the best analysis of containment of the virus. And there is no quid pro quo with predictable outcomes and future modifications to the required restrictions.

Regarding your observation on what Christmas means to you, that is all very well. But is not the view of many, nor how best to manage the pandemic for the overall good of society. Much as we might all enjoy socialising in pub or restaurant setting during the festive season, unfortunately, this year, the benefit does not justify the risk. It will be Christmas nonetheless. And there is in some cautious optimism that some limited family visiting, and indeed cross border travel to do so, may be permissable. But the key aim, is that people are able to enjoy Christmas 2021 to the fullest.

brisan

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

If he’s healthy enough to be in a pub Covid won’t be an issue.

A substantial number of people are being kept alive with no quality of life thanks to modern healthcare, many 70 year olds can’t walk unassisted or dress them selves.

An adult conversation will have to take place I’m afraid

So euthanasia or the old and infirm do not matter ??

bush

suicide_circus wrote: »

If the guards are out doing checkpoints or knocking on doors on December 25th there will be trouble.

Maybe they will go around knocking on doors wishing happy Christmas

hynesie08

At least noxs trolling was entertaining...... Melbourne man is just painful.

FintanMcluskey

brisan wrote: »

So euthanasia or the old and infirm do not matter ??

No not euthanasia, but give us the choice before we get to that point.

I do not want to spend my last decade in a nursing home however

sabat

MelbourneMan wrote: »

Hello.

There appears to be a misconception on your part that the restrictions are some sort of bargain between the people and those guiding actions against the spread of the pandemic. This is not the case. Restrictions must be determined according to the best analysis of containment of the virus. And there is no quid pro quo with predictable outcomes and future modifications to the required restrictions.

Regarding your observation on what Christmas means to you, that is all very well. But is not the view of many, nor how best to manage the pandemic for the overall good of society. Much as we might all enjoy socialising in pub or restaurant setting during the festive season, unfortunately, this year, the benefit does not justify the risk. It will be Christmas nonetheless. And there is in some cautious optimism that some limited family visiting, and indeed cross border travel to do so, may be permissable. But the key aim, is that people are able to enjoy Christmas 2021 to the fullest.

Will you tell whoever your government communications handler is that they're not my fckng overseer?

3xh

Seweryn wrote: »

Yes, they are...

Regarding Pandemrix, in 2010, there were reports of narcolepsy occurring in Sweden and Finland among children who had the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. Not all the safety problems were made public.
By the end of 2009, for each one million doses of the vaccine given, about 76 cases of serious adverse events were reported though this was not made public. In Ireland, the Government kept inviting people to get vaccinated even when it was clear that the pandemic was on the wane and it was nowhere near the catastrophe portrayed by influenza researchers, governments, industry and the media. The Health Service Executive decided to purchase Pandemrix and continued to distribute it even after they knew it was dangerous and untested.

But the list of safety issues with this company is much, much longer including bribery and billions paid out in compensations because of claims over some of their drugs (including Paxil, Avandia, Zofran, etc.). Similar stories are attached to other companies that are working on the Cov. vaccine.

Yep. Indeed. I remember that HSE drive at the time to get vaccines out. My wife was pregnant and was urged to get it at each check-up. It was clearly not necessary, even to us lay persons and wasn’t worth the risk.

And yes, the Pharma industry is such that if the actions of GSK were hushed and bought off, I’m in no doubt other companies engage in similar practices. You’d be foolish to honestly believe they’re all 100% above board and care about your well being.

3xh

MelbourneMan, you speak very strangely. Like off a strict script.

Is it a Freudian slip where you say Christmas 2021?!

almostover

brisan wrote: »

Young chap and an old chap sitting at a bar
Young chap :How old are you ?
Old Chap : 90
Young chap :I would hate to be that old
Old Chap : Come back to me when you are 89 and tell me that again.
Every death is a sadness

Tis easy cite statistics until an event happens to oneself. The mortality rate of COVID may be <1% but if one dies from it it's a 100% mortality rate for them. I'm a big fan of using statistics to risk assess things like COVID but people have to be more sensitive to those who have long term effects post COVID or who have lost loved ones.

ceadaoin.

charlie14 wrote: »

Could that not possibly be because the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention seven year average for deaths due to influenza is 41,000 while U.S. Covid-19 deaths for just 8 months are 224,421.?

If they used the same criteria for reporting covid deaths as they do for the flu, there wouldn't be that much of a discrepancy between the two numbers.

bucketybuck

retro:electro wrote: »

Once December 1st comes around people are going to do what they like regardless of what they say, and the ones who thought they were sacrificing all to “save Christmas” will realise they were sold a pup and have put their lives on hold for a complete fabrication.

Don't kid yourself, most of those sanctimonious windbags wagging their fingers at everybody else about covid, they have no problem bending those same restrictions whenever it suits them. Lecture everybody else about the rules but if they want to break them that is different, they had good reason to. :rolleyes: Like the re-reg poster in here who thinks everybody else should be locked down but happily goes to work and visits his family whenever he wants to.

Of course there are a few people that actually did buy into all this horse****, like those people you hear saying that they haven't seen their partner in 6 months or whatever. To be honest I find it hard to even find any sympathy for them. Anybody that ****ing servile, with such a staggering lack of reasoning facilities, you have to wonder what is even going on in their heads.

polesheep

charlie14 wrote: »

Ticketmaster are not a health care organisation. They are a commercial enterprise that are proposing this due to being aware of flu deaths on average being 41,000 a year compared to 244,421 in just eight months. They are obviously confident that it will not effect ticket sale.

They are not worried about anyone`s health.They know that the vast majority of their client base will be more comfortable attending events that conform to those proposals.


Plus, and a major plus for commercial enterprises, it would ensure no major outbreak of infections would be traced back to any of their events.
Commercially these proposals are a win win. If they were not a company with so much business savvy as Ticketmaster would not be proposing them

Without a vaccine, but you keep side-stepping this as it's inconvenient.

snowcat

almostover wrote: »

Tis easy cite statistics until an event happens to oneself. The mortality rate of COVID may be <1% but if one dies from it it's a 100% mortality rate for them. I'm a big fan of using statistics to risk assess things like COVID but people have to be more sensitive to those who have long term effects post COVID or who have lost loved ones.

Yes driving a car has a tiny risk of death but if you die in a car crash you have a 100% mortality rate. Dont forget about the serious injuries and paralysis from driving cars and the associated people involved. Think about that when you get in your Avensis tomorrow to go to Lidl.

SNNUS

Anyone hanging on Leo or Tony on whether they will grant them access to their family for Xmas need their heads checked.

If it's not level 2 it will be house parties galore for December, even the clappy seals might actually realise they are being fooled.

snowcat

SNNUS wrote: »

Anyone hanging on Leo or Tony on whether they will grant them access to their family for Xmas need their heads checked.

If it's not level 2 it will be house parties galore for December, even the clappy seals might actually realise they are being fooled.

Met a client today. Told me he had had the Covid 4 weeks ago. Still has a cough..Told me all 6 out of 11 people in his group had the covid, All foreign nationals with business here. He spent 2 days in bed and was back out and about again. No test. None of their group had a test. He is fine now bar the lingering cough. I asked him why he did not get tested and he said he would have had to close his business if he was positive

Stormyteacup

snowcat wrote: »

Met a client today. Told me he had had the Covid 4 weeks ago. Still has a cough..Told me all 6 out of 11 people in his group had the covid, All foreign nationals with business here. He spent 2 days in bed and was back out and about again. No test. None of their group had a test. He is fine now bar the lingering cough. I asked him why he did not get tested and he said he would have had to close his business if he was positive

Hard to understand why people don’t realise this is pretty rampant.

If you are used to e.g. 800 plus per week to cover your outgoings, how quick will you be to voluntarily isolate yourself and reduce that to 350 per week for two weeks? Especially if you’re in business already adversely affected.

Rage about how selfish you think it is all you want, but that’s the reality our government has created.

So where does that leave our figures for positive cases - and by extension CFR?

snowcat

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Hard to understand why people don’t realise this is pretty rampant.

If you are used to e.g. 800 plus per week to cover your outgoings, how quick will you be to voluntarily isolate yourself and reduce that to 350 per week for two weeks? Especially if you’re in business already adversely affected.

Rage about how selfish you think it is all you want, but that’s the reality our government has created.

So where does that leave our figures for positive cases - and by extension CFR?

This guy i reckon would be earning a lot more than 350 a week. I'd say add a zero on that, i somehow doubt he is claiming the pup.

patnor1011

charlie14 wrote: »

Thanks, but after that July comment I do not feel an overwhelming need to hear any more of his ramblings

Since that gentleman studied biochemistry and qualified as a GP and have the first-hand experience with dealing with covid I would be more inclined to believe his ramblings than your own ramblings.
Provided that you never stated your qualifications other than appearing to be an amateur statistics enthusiast.

brisan

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

No not euthanasia, but give us the choice before we get to that point.

I do not want to spend my last decade in a nursing home however

You may reconsider that viewpoint the day you go to live in a nursing home ,god forbid the day that happens to any of us .
My wish is to die at 90 from a gunshot wound to the back of the head
Delivered by the jealous husband of a recent Miss World

brisan

snowcat wrote: »

This guy i reckon would be earning a lot more than 350 a week. I'd say add a zero on that, i somehow doubt he is claiming the pup.

That is the point
If he is earning 3500 a week why get a test,close his business and go on 350 a week for 2 weeks
2 days in bed and back in business and no drastic loss of income

Lundstram

1000 fans allowed in Windsor Park tonight for Northern Ireland's play-off final against Slovakia. Capacity 18,500.

Two football games in 82,000 capacity Croke Park on Sunday. How many fans allowed in? 0.

Big Tony would faint at the mere suggestion of this happening here.

Gael23

brisan wrote: »

You may reconsider that viewpoint the day you go to live in a nursing home ,god forbid the day that happens to any of us .
My wish is to die at 90 from a gunshot wound to the back of the head
Delivered by the jealous husband of a recent Miss World

I have a family friend that had to go into a home recently age 96 following a fall. She knew she could no longer safely live alone so you do reconsider wanting to be cared for at home when things change.

patnor1011

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

For someone who's not anti-vax you're hitting a pretty high number of the standard antivaxxer talking points.

You are naive if you think that everything is black and white.
There are not just provaxxers and anti-vaccine people out there. There is a whole bunch of grey out there plus other colors. People who can think and decide independently based on the experience and information they receive and analyze.

You fell for the standard lazy way argument "if you are not with us you must be against".

FrStone

Gerald Barry a virologist from UCD was on prime time tonight. He would be a bit more cautious than me, but overall I thought he was quite good.

Basically pointed out that we can't keep going into level 5. Also made the point that if the HSE actually have testing capacity of 140k, we are only testing 75k, let's use the extra capacity to test and isolate.

patnor1011

Deleted User wrote: »

I think you're missing the whole point repeatedly :pac:

Anyway, you go get your rushed, not long-term tested, brand new RNA tech vaccines. Twice annually. Come back in 2022 after a fair few doses and let us know you're still alive. God forbid the Covid gets you

Not just this.
Fools think that there is some magical kitty or fairy who will pay for all of it for them.
Wait for it. There will be a free one or two doses at the start (well governments pay for it from our taxes so not so free anyway) just to ease the path to make it all mandatory.
Then we will promptly move to the requirement of say 2 doses a year which we will have to pay ourselves.

normanoffside

More and more of the covid hospitalisations acquired it in Hospital. Was this mentioned in tonight's presser?


https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1327011837985103872

patnor1011

JDD wrote: »

These continued restrictions, post vaccine, like what Ticketmaster have suggested, will in all likelihood only apply if there is a low uptake of the vaccine.

If 40% of the population take the vaccine, and 60% decide not to then we still have a significant chance that our hospitals will be overrun by the infected, especially in circumstances where we return to packed public transport, packed pubs, house parties etc etc.

I implore people who think the vaccine is rushed to read the vaccine thread. Every vaccine that has ever been developed in the past 100 years would also have been developed and approved within the same 12 month timeframe, had the same amount of money, resources and priority been applied to them as has been applied to the current batch of contenders.

Anyone is of course perfectly within their rights to refuse to take the vaccine. However, from a public policy perspective, if there is too many of these people, and a good vaccine is available, then we can't risk everyone's health by having our health system overrun. We can't continue with lockdowns, so some other tool will have to be used.

Either we allow private companies to discriminate based on a health passport, or we make those who refuse to take the vaccine without a health reason pay for their health treatment, should they become infected and need hospitalisation. The average stay in hospital is ten days, the average cost for a hospital bed is about €800 per night. So either you pay for it out of your health insurance or it is taken by way of increased tax over the next five years directly from your pay packet by the exchequer.

That way everyone is happy. You can continue with your right to bodily integrity, can continue to enjoy life, but will have to pay for any covid hospital treatment from your own back pocket. If you are in your 20's and early 30's then the chances you'll have to pay €8,000 for treatment are small. If you are in your 40's or 50's, well, maybe the prospect of having to pay for treatment might put your skepticism regarding the vaccine in sharper focus. You may continue to decide to not take the vaccine, which again, is very much your prerogative.

First - the vaccine thread is absolutely unbalanced and biased towards 4 particular companies/vaccines to the point of the thread being just an advertisement of certain products. They completely dismiss Chinese and Russian development even though the Chinese, for example, had a clear headstart in developing vaccines due to the pandemic and vaccine effort starting there a couple of months sooner than in the west. To me, Chinese vaccines or treatment looks to be working as we can clearly see that China moved on from lockdowns, masks, and hysteria in general.

Secondly - if you want to penalize people in the name of fairness then sure let us go for it. Let covid vaccine refusniks pay for their treatment in full along with every smoker, obese person, drug addict, and anyone who indulges in more than 5 units of alcohol per week. We can broaden the scope as we go along but that should be enough for a start. If taking a vaccine is a cure to access free health so is stopping smoking, drinking, snorting, or gorging on food and carbs.

No, for real now - what you propose with penalizing people who do not share your very narrow and extremely selfish world view is immoral and despicable.

Stheno

normanoffside wrote: »

More and more of the covid hospitalisations acquired it in Hospital. Was this mentioned in tonight's presser?


https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1327011837985103872

Don't be ridiculous, the party line is that hospitals are safe

UHL have 160 staff self isolating either due to having the virus or being a close contact

I think that since the outset 25% of cases have been health care workers

Yet when questions about how this issue is being managed was asked today there was a pile of mumbo jumbo about response processes in hospitals

How in the name of Christ have the HSE etc not gotten a grip on the level of infections in hospital environments?

patnor1011

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Good point. If vaccination became mandatory then when do they decide sufficient protection from vaccine uptake has been achieved - and drop the demand for a vaccine?

After investing vast resources in vaccine research, production and roll-out, and a possible ‘health passport’ industry created, I can’t see any backtrack on it.

Never.
They already have this covered. It will be a 2 dose vaccine that may offer "protection" for less than a year.
That makes it a cash cow for the generations to come.