Covid vaccine , age before special interest groups good or bad? *Mod Note In OP*

Darwin

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Teachers don't have a certificate to say they are teachers.

Therefore it adds too much admin to say teachers can go on x day and be vaccinated.

Teachers are required to register with the teaching council - an excellent starting place to compile a list.

astrofool

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

So why aren't older people only subject to lockdown and why are the daily numbers so important?

The daily numbers are important because if the case numbers get too high, the number of people hospitalized in the younger age groups can also overwhelm the hospitals. It's also why they report on the age groups of those who test positive and the number of people in hospital and ICU, if the case numbers go to 10,000+ a day, then even at 1% hospitalisation rate, that's still 100 people per day, 700 per week, that are taking up space in the hospital.

derb12

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Teachers don't have a certificate to say they are teachers.

Therefore it adds too much admin to say teachers can go on x day and be vaccinated.

.

Teachers literally do have a certificate to say they are teachers.

Natterjack from Kerry

Pussyhands wrote: »

Why don't they do walk in vaccinations like other countries? Advertise "Next week all those in education can go to X to get the vaccine"

That's the very problem. It's too unclear..
What does 'in education' mean.

Teachers? Teachers who used to teach but have left it? Teachers who are unemployed so not attached to a school? SNAs? People who give grinds from their homes? People is 3rd level? Universities only? Or those teaching in assorted private or professional schools? Those who give night classes in flower arranging? People with a hdip but have never worked as teachers?
It's too messy.
Age is just so simple, no arguments, and gets the protection to those who most need it in order.

BailMeOut

the focus for the moment should be on people who have a higher risk of death should they get the virus.

History Queen

meeeeh wrote: »

Thanks. I have no objection to that. It's very dangerous route when someone's percived morality or immorality becomes main criteria for health treatments.

Agreed. For the same reason I understand why prisoners should be prioritised for vaccination. I assume they are being?

lbj666

https://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/share/radio1/21932525

Karina butler's interview, gives a clear explanation that age is the obvious factor regarding risk not occupation the exception being healthcare workers obviously.

meeeeh

History Queen wrote: »

Agreed. For the same reason I understand why prisoners should be prioritised for vaccination. I assume they are being?

Probably. You can't send them to hotel to self isolate if numbers of infected get out of hand.

Necro

Pussyhands wrote: »

So they're moving from group levels to age levels because they say it'll be too difficult to work it all out.

But weren't we told we're going to be getting a load of vaccines in a month or so?

Why don't they do walk in vaccinations like other countries? Advertise "Next week all those in education can go to X to get the vaccine"

etc.?

But really, teachers need to wind their neck in. "b-b-but we're enclosed with 30 kids all day"

People working in shops are in close contact with way more than that all day every day! Look at the cross contamination in a shop. Person puts item on the till...worker touches that item and passes it back to the buyer.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

That's the very problem. It's too unclear..
What does 'in education' mean.

Teachers? Teachers who used to teach but have left it? Teachers who are unemployed so not attached to a school? SNAs? People who give grinds from their homes? People is 3rd level? Universities only? Or those teaching in assorted private or professional schools? Those who give night classes in flower arranging? People with a hdip but have never worked as teachers?
It's too messy.
Age is just so simple, no arguments, and gets the protection to those who most need it in order.

Mod: Final warning folks, next it's cards and/or thread/forum bans - there is a mod note in relation to this focus on teachers in this thread, go and discuss it in the dedicated schools thread

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

There is more to this discussion than teachers and teachers unions. At least there had better be, because i dont intend to see two threads on the topic of COVID and schools.

If you want to discuss COVID and schools, go to the dedicated thread for it.

If you want to discuss the rest of this topic, do it here.

ThewhiteJesus

Hopefully the rollout will speed up now so it sounds like a good idea to simplify but will it change again, only Paul Reid knows

Away With The Fairies

Hopefully now the workplaces that were at the bottom of the vaccination list will have some protected staff.

Natterjack from Kerry

Teachers was just the example cited.

Retail workers then:

People on checkout counters? People in food retail? Shop managers who dont face customers but are on a shop floor ? Admin people in retail ? Retail only operating click and collect? People who stack shelves but dont interface with customers ? Internet based retail ?People who work behind in the warehouse ? Part time workers ? Union members only ? Someone who says they are in retail but hasnt worked in retail for years ? Forklift drivers unloading goods for shops? Petrol stations ? Someone who did work in retail but was laid off last year ? Etc, etc.

Again, segments are just too messy to decide who exactly qualifies or doesnt. Age works.

endacl

Wonder how this will affect the process for those who have had a first jab and are waiting to be called for the second, but are down the age list?

Away With The Fairies

endacl wrote: »

Wonder how this will affect the process for those who have had a first jab and are waiting to be called for the second, but are down the age list?

I'd say you'd get the second jab. I think they're still working on the old list. I know someone who should be down the list going by the ages. But they were still called for a vaccine next week based on their occupation. So not sure when the new list kicks in.

moonage

No healthy person under 60 should be vaccinated.

The vaccines at best reduce symptoms. They don't stop infection or transmission.

It's crazy giving non-vulnerable people under-tested, unapproved, experimental treatments whose medium and long term safety is questionable.

is_that_so

At the risk of getting caught out by the date I don't understand why a government minister is challenging the NIAC decision they approved. TDs lobbying, of course, is just another day's work.


https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0401/1207355-vaccines/

is_that_so

moonage wrote: »

No healthy person under 60 should be vaccinated.

The vaccines at best reduce symptoms. They don't stop infection or transmission.

It's crazy giving non-vulnerable people under-tested, unapproved, experimental treatments whose medium and long term safety is questionable.

Moderna and Pfizer might disagree with you on this.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-vaccine-moderna-pfizer-transmission-disease

is_that_so

endacl wrote: »

Wonder how this will affect the process for those who have had a first jab and are waiting to be called for the second, but are down the age list?

Probably not at all as they are all in groups not affected by this change. Don't you get a second date when you go for the first one?

History Queen

moonage wrote: »

No healthy person under 60 should be vaccinated.

The vaccines at best reduce symptoms. They don't stop infection or transmission.

It's crazy giving non-vulnerable people under-tested, unapproved, experimental treatments whose medium and long term safety is questionable.

Including health care workers? Nursing home staff etc? Really?

The vaccines are widely tested and approved.

Wanderer78

is_that_so wrote:

Probably not at all as they are all in groups not affected by this change. Don't you get a second date when you go for the first one?

Yea you get your second date at the first.

I'm wondering am I one of the lucky ones receiving the jab, due to this new approach, just received my first contact, didn't expect that at all

Happydays2020

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Yea you get your second date at the first.

I'm wondering am I one of the lucky ones receiving the jab, due to this new approach, just received my first contact, didn't expect that at all

Perhaps. I think there is still the factor of the AZ vaccine and over 65’s so there will naturally be some overlaps in vaccinations until that full cohort is vaccinated.

Wanderer78

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Perhaps. I think there is still the factor of the AZ vaccine and over 65’s so there will naturally be some overlaps in vaccinations until that full cohort is vaccinated.

i dont feel like i should be getting this yet, as im sure theres others far more vulnerable that me, but i ll take it

Concretejungle

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i dont feel like i should be getting this yet, as im sure theres others far more vulnerable that me, but i ll take it

You can please some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. That's the problem

Wanderer78

Concretejungle wrote: »

You can please some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. That's the problem

ah vaccines has become a mess, it was always gonna be

astrofool

moonage wrote: »

No healthy person under 60 should be vaccinated.

Untrue, a lot of people in the under 60 age group have died, less than over 60's age group, but there is a lot more people in the under 60 group that will die without vaccines.

moonage wrote: »

The vaccines at best reduce symptoms. They don't stop infection or transmission.

Untrue, vaccines are between 60-95% effective at stopping all symptoms, with the remaining % only getting mild to moderate symptoms and no severe symptoms. They also reduce transmission, with the % reduction looking about 66%.

moonage wrote: »

It's crazy giving non-vulnerable people under-tested, unapproved, experimental treatments whose medium and long term safety is questionable.

Untrue, there has been no less testing on these vaccines than any other vaccines, they have been rolled out safely to hundreds of millions of people.

.42.

Delighted they will go with age.

Stops the Unions fighting with each other and the Government.

Now we have an even playing field.

Maybe im biased as I hate unions

KrustyUCC

is_that_so wrote: »

At the risk of getting caught out by the date I don't understand why a government minister is challenging the NIAC decision they approved. TDs lobbying, of course, is just another day's work.


https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0401/1207355-vaccines/

"Last night, Minister Norma Foley told Fianna Fáil TDs and Senators that it is a significant change and it would be "helpful" if NIAC explained the rationale behind the move."

Pretty sure that's why Karina Butler was on the radio yesterday

She perfectly explained the rationale behind the change

Plumbthedepths

KrustyUCC wrote: »

"Last night, Minister Norma Foley told Fianna Fáil TDs and Senators that it is a significant change and it would be "helpful" if NIAC explained the rationale behind the move."

Pretty sure that's why Karina Butler was on the radio yesterday

She perfectly explained the rationale behind the change

Never underestimate the focus a TD has on a future election and the possibility of a cohort campaigning against them.

KrustyUCC

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Never underestimate the focus a TD has on a future election and the possibility of a cohort campaigning against them.

Foley has already lost the support of teachers alright

She's hated by them

Happydays2020

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Foley has already lost the support of teachers alright

She's hated by them

They hate any Minister who wishes to reform or will now bow the need to their every whim.

Turtwig

is_that_so wrote: »

At the risk of getting caught out by the date I don't understand why a government minister is challenging the NIAC decision they approved. TDs lobbying, of course, is just another day's work.


https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0401/1207355-vaccines/

She has to. Otherwise it looks like she abandoned her own employees.

Now she can claim she can agrees and sympathises with the teachers but the matter is out of her hands. Pins everything back on NIAC.

Spineless leadership? Yep. There is a possibility she does genuinely disagree with NIAC. I think it's more likely she's just thinking of her own image, union relations and the next election.

funnydoggy

moonage wrote: »

No healthy person under 60 should be vaccinated.

The vaccines at best reduce symptoms. They don't stop infection or transmission.

It's crazy giving non-vulnerable people under-tested, unapproved, experimental treatments whose medium and long term safety is questionable.

This reads like something from June 2020

Natterjack from Kerry

Turtwig wrote: »

She has to. Otherwise it looks like she abandoned her own employees.

Now she can claim she can agrees and sympathises with the teachers but the matter is out of her hands. Pins everything back on NIAC.

Spineless leadership? Yep. There is a possibility she does genuinely disagree with NIAC. I think it's more likely she's just thinking of her own image, union relations and the next election.

And she knows its going ahead as revised anyway, so it's not as if she is going to achieve any reversal. Probably even approved by cabinet, or M Martin that she do so as politically the best position to take for her and the govt overall.

Natterjack from Kerry

funnydoggy wrote: »

This reads like something from June 2020

2020 QAnon.

Plumbthedepths

A consultant doctor from the Coombe took vaccines from the hospital home with him to vaccinate members of his/her family. No names yet. Absolutely shocking.

iamwhoiam

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

A consultant doctor from the Coombe took vaccines from the hospital home with him to vaccinate members of his/her family. No names yet. Absolutely shocking.

It must be a criminal offence surely ? Theft of public property .

is_that_so

iamwhoiam wrote: »

It must be a criminal offence surely ? Theft of public property .

Not a crime as there is no law for it. The whole guidance thing was bit less clear back then but it's a very good example of what shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

Multipass

is_that_so wrote: »

Not a crime as there is no law for it. The whole guidance thing was bit less clear back then but it's a very good example of what shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

Stealing medications from a hospital is certainly something to be struck off for.

Plumbthedepths

is_that_so wrote: »

Not a crime as there is no law for it. The whole guidance thing was bit less clear back then but it's a very good example of what shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

Honestly I wouldn't be sure about it not being a criminal offence.

is_that_so

Multipass wrote: »

Stealing medications from a hospital is certainly something to be struck off for.

There seemed to be tacit acceptance of its removal by the hospital so no theft.

iamwhoiam

is_that_so wrote: »

Not a crime as there is no law for it. The whole guidance thing was bit less clear back then but it's a very good example of what shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

It absolutely is theft . And there is a law against stealing drugs from a hospital

is_that_so

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Honestly I wouldn't be sure about it not being a criminal offence.

Based on the guidance at the time they could claim good faith, a very weak argument morally. I don't think anyone wants to look at criminality but they do want to make a very good example of them.

I wouldn't be so sure about it not been criminal (albeit nothing that would end up with jail time). Was a prescription written for the vaccine?

iamwhoiam

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I wouldn't be so sure about it not been criminal (albeit nothing that would end up with jail time). Was a prescription written for the vaccine?

Plus property of the HSE was taken from a hospital .

expectationlost

https://www.rte.ie/news/regional/2021/0401/1207471-ireland-vaccine-latest/

"The centre has found that the status of the registered person may change to vaccinated if contacted by another vaccination centre and this has resulted in people not attending for appointment.

is there no way to tell the HSE that you already got the vaccine? https://twitter.com/FergalBowers/status/1377639985558458371

many more example below, ppl getting the texts the day after the appointment date

Multipass

is_that_so wrote: »

There seemed to be tacit acceptance of its removal by the hospital so no theft.

That says it all - the rot goes all the way to the top.

is_that_so

Multipass wrote: »

That says it all - the rot goes all the way to the top.

The two of them, the Coombe and the Beacon, are perfect examples of how not to do things, ever.

expectationlost

is_that_so wrote: »

There seemed to be tacit acceptance of its removal by the hospital so no theft.

to the medical council then.

Amirani

is_that_so wrote: »

There seemed to be tacit acceptance of its removal by the hospital so no theft.

The hospital don't own the vaccines, it's not their acceptance to give.

is_that_so

expectationlost wrote: »

to the medical council then.

Maybe, the taking it home is a worse transgression but you can see them hiding behind best effort to use the vaccines, but their best effort was awful.