Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

1…110111113115116…328

Comments

  • #3362
    Renjit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Renjit


    What is even happening with USA? 182,980 cases in a day. Looks like going back to the same level and maybe worse.


  • #3363
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    Wolf359f wrote: »
    Where are you reading about mandatory vaccination for Covid in Ireland, apart from Facebook obviously. I'm not an Anti-Vaxxer, but if it was mandatory, I would side with the anti-vaxxers, for a different reason though (I don't believe the 5G, mind control, devil semen element, but the self choice I would agree with)

    This thread


  • #3364
    Renjit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Renjit


    France, Italy are not in better shape either. Looks like it wont be normal anytime soon.


  • #3365
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    GT89 wrote: »
    This thread
    Wolf359f wrote: »
    Where are you reading about mandatory vaccination for Covid in Ireland, apart from Facebook obviously. I'm not an Anti-Vaxxer, but if it was mandatory, I would side with the anti-vaxxers, for a different reason though (I don't believe the 5G, mind control, devil semen element, but the self choice I would agree with)

    It's ok, government or health and safety policies are not enacted based upon random people on here. You need to stay away from the likes of Facebook!


  • #3366
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,450 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Better late than never, tonights HSE Operations report.

    251 covid patients in hospital, down 21.
    33 in ICU, down 5
    23 on ventilators, no change
    0 ICU deaths

    5 cases diagnosed in hospitals in the 24hrs from 8pm - 8pm


  • Advertisement
  • #3367
    blowitupref
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭blowitupref


    HSE operations update

    In hospital 251 (decrease of 21)
    In ICU 33 (decrease of 5)


  • #3368
    440Hertz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 651 ✭✭✭440Hertz


    On the vaccines issue:

    This situation is unprecedented. We never had a global response to a major disease outbreak on this scale before and it has brought in basically unlimited financial and technical resources. Quite literally everything we’ve got scientifically is being made available and thrown at solving this.

    The bandwidth of the ability to do trials and testing is like nothing we’ve ever achieved before.

    I think quite honestly these vaccines may well be a demonstration of what the current state of the art biotechnology can achieve and also what can be done when international resources are brought together.

    It’s a watershed moment in science and technology in many ways. I mean even 20 years ago, what’s been achieved would have been sci-fi.


  • #3369
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    Better late than never, tonights HSE Operations report.

    251 covid patients in hospital, down 21.
    33 in ICU, down 5
    23 on ventilators, no change
    0 ICU deaths

    5 cases diagnosed in hospitals in the 24hrs from 8pm - 8pm

    Hopefully we see a significant drop over the next week. That's a large decrease in ICU patients and a welcomed one. We always seem to fixate on ICU as it's not a resource easily increased, so any reduction without people passing away is welcomed.


  • #3370
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    440Hertz wrote: »
    On the vaccines issue:

    This situation is unprecedented. We never had a global response to a major disease outbreak on this scale before and it has brought in basically unlimited financial and technical resources. Quite literally everything we’ve got scientifically is being made available and thrown at solving this.

    The bandwidth of the ability to do trials and testing is like nothing we’ve ever achieved before.

    I think quite honestly these vaccines may well be a demonstration of what the current state of the art biotechnology can achieve and also what can be done when international resources are brought together.

    It’s a watershed moment in science and technology in many ways. I mean even 20 years ago, what’s been achieved would have been sci-fi.

    A little piece of me hopes we will learn from this pandemic.
    In relation to wet markets or indeed mass farming livestock.
    The way governments can throw money at a global issue that causes an immediate threat and how the public can stand up and help and do their part.
    We have global warming on the horizon and it maybe something where we act too late, but this pandemic may open our eyes.

    But there's also the strong possibility were vaccines become available en mass that we just forget and go back to our previous ways until the next crisis.
    We may never learn from our mistakes.


  • #3371
    Goldengirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,001 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    polesheep wrote: »
    First of all, there is scant information available as yet regarding any vaccine. Some may work. They may be very effective or they may be limited. They may offer protection and limit the spread of the virus or they may simply offer protection. We don't know yet. One thing is clear, many people, from all kinds of backgrounds are wary of taking a vaccine straight off. These people are not anti-vax, they are simply cautious. Anti-vaxxers will never take ANY vaccine that is developed to combat Covid. Lumping everyone who is cautious about taking a vaccine developed at breakneck speed with anti-vaxxers is not only disingenuous but also counter productive.

    ironic , so careful about taking an approved vaccine but want to open the pubs gyms and everything else quick. :confused:

    Whiff of BS about that !


  • Advertisement
  • #3372
    Goldengirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,001 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    GT89 wrote: »
    Simple solution don't treat people in hospital who test positive for covid if they have not been vaccinated. Unvaccinated people will either get the vaccine, go private if they develop covid or die.

    Private hospitals wont be taking Covid positive patients , as if they would risk their business.


  • #3373
    Polar101
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,043 ✭✭✭Polar101


    polesheep wrote: »
    First of all, there is scant information available as yet regarding any vaccine. Some may work. They may be very effective or they may be limited. They may offer protection and limit the spread of the virus or they may simply offer protection. We don't know yet. One thing is clear, many people, from all kinds of backgrounds are wary of taking a vaccine straight off. These people are not anti-vax, they are simply cautious. Anti-vaxxers will never take ANY vaccine that is developed to combat Covid. Lumping everyone who is cautious about taking a vaccine developed at breakneck speed with anti-vaxxers is not only disingenuous but also counter productive.

    It's difficult to agree with any of this. There's plenty of information available about vaccines, and the people who are developing them know exactly what they do and what they don't do. It doesn't particularly matter what Johnny down at the pub thinks of the vaccine, or whether he's going to take it or not. If there is a national vaccination program, then many people will be taking the vaccine, because they know it will help to protect them, and others, and they also know it will be the quickest road back to normality and towards the end of the pandemic.

    "Many people are saying it" is what certain figures in the US are saying when they have no proof of things, but want to make it sound like they do.

    Also, people who don't take a vaccine because they don't trust the vaccine are just that - anti-vaxxers.


  • #3374
    Goldengirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,001 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Polar101 wrote: »
    It's difficult to agree with any of this. There's plenty of information available about vaccines, and the people who are developing them know exactly what they do and what they don't do. It doesn't particularly matter what Johnny down at the pub thinks of the vaccine, or whether he's going to take it or not. If there is a national vaccination program, then many people will be taking the vaccine, because they know it will help to protect them, and others, and they also know it will be the quickest road back to normality and towards the end of the pandemic.

    "Many people are saying it" is what certain figures in the US are saying when they have no proof of things, but want to make it sound like they do.

    Also, people who don't take a vaccine because they don't trust the vaccine are just that - anti-vaxxers.

    Exactly .
    Or just a few WUMs .


  • #3375
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Goldengirl wrote: »
    ironic , so careful about taking an approved vaccine but want to open the pubs gyms and everything else quick. :confused:

    Whiff of BS about that !

    I think running on a treadmill or having a pint are safe things to do...

    I’d be more worried taking a vaccine that I don’t need that we have no long term data on.


  • #3376
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    Mandatory vaccine not the way the go, need education on why its important to take it etc.


  • #3377
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    Do you have a source for that? Would be interesting. Jury is out in my mind but I'll add something here which might be useful. Well kids are more likely to be asymptomatic than adults so therefore less likely to be tested. I would think any estimate of the proportion of those asymptomatic will be underestimated as the figure will be skewed towards those with symptoms.

    In Israel "Most children with #COVID19 were asymptomatic (51-70%).

    As shown in the figure below, children of pre-school & primary school age were more likely to be asymptomatic than older children.

    The top (pink) bar indicates the proportion who were asymptomatic in each age group."

    https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/reports/bz-400844120/he/files_publications_corona_bz-400844120.pdf

    532831.png

    You shouldn’t post facts like that, people will accuse you of being condescending.


  • #3378
    Str8outtaWuhan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 968 ✭✭✭Str8outtaWuhan


    Polar101 wrote: »
    It's difficult to agree with any of this. There's plenty of information available about vaccines, and the people who are developing them know exactly what they do and what they don't do. It doesn't particularly matter what Johnny down at the pub thinks of the vaccine, or whether he's going to take it or not. If there is a national vaccination program, then many people will be taking the vaccine, because they know it will help to protect them, and others, and they also know it will be the quickest road back to normality and towards the end of the pandemic.

    "Many people are saying it" is what certain figures in the US are saying when they have no proof of things, but want to make it sound like they do.

    Also, people who don't take a vaccine because they don't trust the vaccine are just that - anti-vaxxers.

    Tell that to the people queueing at the steps of the high court over the swine flu jab


  • #3379
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    hmmm wrote: »
    Very true.

    The other thing is that people who are vaccinated will feel more inclined to mix again, but will still not want to take the chance of mixing with people who may be carrying the virus. Companies like airlines will want to make their customers feel it is safe to travel, so the easiest thing in the world will be for them to require evidence of vaccination or a recent negative test.

    We'll have an interesting debate later in the year about school children, offices etc. Will it be acceptable from a health & safety point of view to allow unvaccinated people into schools, offices, workplaces etc.? They may have rights themselves, but so do the other people in those locations. Will you want a nursing home worker who is not vaccinated? Or a hospital worker? Or a bar person or waiter?

    This isn't measles or mumps, this is a dangerous disease which is very dangerous for certain categories of people.

    So what will happen in your mandatory vaccine utopia if the take up among health care workers is similar to the take up for the flu vaccine? How will you run the hospitals with 55% or so of staff?


  • #3380
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Wolf359f wrote: »
    Can you supply a timeline for safe vaccines and how long they took to develop compared to Covid vaccines? (assuming you believe there's such a thing as a safe vaccine)
    The development stage is probably the shortest stage in any vaccine. More money = more staff = more research = fast development (with all the same research) The testing phases need time, they can't be rushed, so they ran them parallel to each other.

    No need for the snide remark. I have stated numerous times that I am pro-vaccination.

    I used the word development in the broad sense, I thought that was obvious.


  • #3381
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Wolf359f wrote: »
    Because 40% vaccinated won't drive the virus away. It will still have 60% of the population to spread through, which is enough for it to live on and on etc...
    Meaning below the herd immunity rate (guessed at 70%) it will be endemic and not eradicated. The 60% non vulnerable will eventually become vulnerable (through old age or illness) and need vaccination eventualy.

    My post was in response to a claim that the hospitals would be overrun unless everyone has the vaccine.

    Of course we all become vulnerable at some point. I have already stated that if I was in a vulnerable category I would be first in line for the vaccine, but I'm not and I can afford to wait a while.


  • Advertisement
  • #3382
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Polar101 wrote: »
    It's difficult to agree with any of this. There's plenty of information available about vaccines, and the people who are developing them know exactly what they do and what they don't do. It doesn't particularly matter what Johnny down at the pub thinks of the vaccine, or whether he's going to take it or not. If there is a national vaccination program, then many people will be taking the vaccine, because they know it will help to protect them, and others, and they also know it will be the quickest road back to normality and towards the end of the pandemic.

    "Many people are saying it" is what certain figures in the US are saying when they have no proof of things, but want to make it sound like they do.

    Also, people who don't take a vaccine because they don't trust the vaccine are just that - anti-vaxxers.

    We'll only know what the vaccines can deliver when they are brought to the market.

    I never said "Many people are saying it", so please don't put words in my mouth.

    Your last sentence is just fundamentally wrong or will you willingly line up for the Chinese or Russian vaccine?


  • #3383
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,450 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    polesheep wrote: »
    My post was in response to a claim that the hospitals would be overrun unless everyone has the vaccine..

    FYI that wasn't the claim and you know it, never mentioned everyone not having it.

    If there was a large percentage of the population that isn't vaccinated then there is the potential for the health system to come under strain, thats not even up for debate really.

    Nice try to twist things around though, I won't be replying further, it would be a waste of time. Ignorance at its finest and pointed out by multiple posters


  • #3384
    Roger_007
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,886 ✭✭✭✭Roger_007


    Polar101 wrote: »
    It's difficult to agree with any of this. There's plenty of information available about vaccines, and the people who are developing them know exactly what they do and what they don't do. It doesn't particularly matter what Johnny down at the pub thinks of the vaccine, or whether he's going to take it or not. If there is a national vaccination program, then many people will be taking the vaccine, because they know it will help to protect them, and others, and they also know it will be the quickest road back to normality and towards the end of the pandemic.

    "Many people are saying it" is what certain figures in the US are saying when they have no proof of things, but want to make it sound like they do.

    Also, people who don't take a vaccine because they don't trust the vaccine are just that - anti-vaxxers.

    I would always have some reservations about any new drug/vaccine that comes on the market. There have been some tragic occurrences in the past where some unanticipated effect of a drug comes to light long after its certification. There is also a possibility of a flaw in the manufacturing or storage process. In the USA, in particular, there is acute awareness of the tragedy of the Cutter Incident where a batch of defective polio vaccine was given to 140,000 people and 40,000 of them developed polio as a result.
    There is also something suspicious about the way Pfizer released their phase 3 trial results before the trial was actually completed and without releasing the relevant supporting data. It looks like they were trying to gain a market advantage on their competitors and it also yielded a handsome windfall profit for the CEO who sold 60% of his shares on the same day as the results were released and after the share price shot up, (just a coincidence I suppose).


  • #3385
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    FYI that wasn't the claim and you know it, never mentioned everyone not having it.

    If there was a large percentage of the population that isn't vaccinated then there is the potential for the health system to come under strain.

    Nice try to twist things around though, I won't be replying further, it would be a waste of time. Ignorance at its finest and pointed out by multiple posters

    My apologies, I wasn't precise. What you said was, "Anti-vaxxers would put the health service under pressure as covid would still be circulating and therefore mean we can't get back to any sort of normality seeing as we wouldn't have hospital capacity, therefore require restrictions." Does this not imply that if anti-vaxxers and those who prefer to wait don't take the vaccine then the health service will come under pressure? Hence my reply that if the vulnerable are vaccinated then we will not see that kind of pressure on the health service.

    I assure you I wasn't trying to twist things around.


  • #3386
    Hamsterchops
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,613 ✭✭✭Hamsterchops


    wadacrack wrote: »
    Mandatory vaccine not the way the go, need education on why its important to take it etc.

    Sounds like there'll be at least three vaccines available within the next six months to a year.

    Obviously there's the -80° Pfizer BioNTech drug that has just made world headlines, then there's the Oxford vaccine (still in the pipeline) + the Novavax trials at the Chelsea & Westminster hospital, probably many other trials too for all I know?


  • #3387
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Roger_007 wrote: »
    I would always have some reservations about any new drug/vaccine that comes on the market. There have been some tragic occurrences in the past where some unanticipated effect of a drug comes to light long after its certification. There is also a possibility of a flaw in the manufacturing or storage process. In the USA, in particular, there is acute awareness of the tragedy of the Cutter Incident where a batch of defective polio vaccine was given to 140,000 people and 40,000 of them developed polio as a result.
    There is also something suspicious about the way Pfizer released their phase 3 trial results before the trial was actually completed and without releasing the relevant supporting data. It looks like they were trying to gain a market advantage on their competitors and it also yielded a handsome windfall profit for the CEO who sold 60% of his shares on the same day as the results were released and after the share price shot up, (just a coincidence I suppose).

    Good post, but be prepared for an attack. Some people don't think you should be permitted to question these things or show any sign of caution.


  • #3388
    owlbethere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,329 ✭✭✭owlbethere


    Roger_007 wrote: »
    I would always have some reservations about any new drug/vaccine that comes on the market. There have been some tragic occurrences in the past where some unanticipated effect of a drug comes to light long after its certification. There is also a possibility of a flaw in the manufacturing or storage process. In the USA, in particular, there is acute awareness of the tragedy of the Cutter Incident where a batch of defective polio vaccine was given to 140,000 people and 40,000 of them developed polio as a result.
    There is also something suspicious about the way Pfizer released their phase 3 trial results before the trial was actually completed and without releasing the relevant supporting data. It looks like they were trying to gain a market advantage on their competitors and it also yielded a handsome windfall profit for the CEO who sold 60% of his shares on the same day as the results were released and after the share price shot up, (just a coincidence I suppose).

    I had my heart set on the Oxford Vaccine. I was hoping that will reach us first and I'm hoping that will be the one we get here in Ireland. I trust the Oxford Vaccine so much because it was in development for years for MERS and all they had to do was tweak it to Sars Cov 2/Covid.

    Having said that, I'm not going to turn my nose up to any vaccine. I would rather get the vaccine and hope for the best that it all goes well than gamble with the virus. I know it's claimed some people get lucky and they are asymptomatic but not everybody gets that lucky and some people are suffering for months. For me I'm not willing to take that risk.


  • #3389
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    owlbethere wrote: »
    I had my heart set on the Oxford Vaccine. I was hoping that will reach us first and I'm hoping that will be the one we get here in Ireland. I trust the Oxford Vaccine so much because it was in development for years for MERS and all they had to do was tweak it to Sars Cov 2/Covid.

    Having said that, I'm not going to turn my nose up to any vaccine. I would rather get the vaccine and hope for the best that it all goes well than gamble with the virus. I know it's claimed some people get lucky and they are asymptomatic but not everybody gets that lucky and some people are suffering for months. For me I'm not willing to take that risk.

    It almost certainly will all go well. Despite all the back and forth over the last couple of pages, I have a lot of confidence in the scientists creating the vaccines. I just believe that I should have a right to ask questions and be cautious. And I don't believe that vaccines should be mandatory and that includes through the threat of social exclusion.


  • #3390
    CoronaBlocker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 247 ✭✭CoronaBlocker


    Roger_007 wrote: »
    I would always have some reservations about any new drug/vaccine that comes on the market. There have been some tragic occurrences in the past where some unanticipated effect of a drug comes to light long after its certification. There is also a possibility of a flaw in the manufacturing or storage process. In the USA, in particular, there is acute awareness of the tragedy of the Cutter Incident where a batch of defective polio vaccine was given to 140,000 people and 40,000 of them developed polio as a result.
    There is also something suspicious about the way Pfizer released their phase 3 trial results before the trial was actually completed and without releasing the relevant supporting data. It looks like they were trying to gain a market advantage on their competitors and it also yielded a handsome windfall profit for the CEO who sold 60% of his shares on the same day as the results were released and after the share price shot up, (just a coincidence I suppose).

    You spit the words out like he was the devil but there's nothing illegal in what the CEO did - he hadn't loaded up on shares the week before or anything - but even if he had it wouldn't be a problem. I did it though - I bought Pfizer shares for $35 at the end of October on news that Pfizer were building two factories specifically for vaccine production (Newstalk) and on the expectations of a November release (BBC). I sold the shares just after opening on Monday for $40 - that's a 12% increase on my investment and I did that with absolutely no insider knowledge - none. It was all based on publicly sourced information and done via an online trading portal that anyone can sign up to use. Anyone could have done what he or I did - don't hate us for it :cool:

    Regarding the vaccine - I'll be in the queue as soon as possible.


  • Advertisement
  • #3391
    Ger Roe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭Ger Roe


    GT89 wrote: »
    Pretty much everyone who get's the flu vaccine is either a hcw or medically vulnerable. I don't think very much people in a not at risk group get's it.

    Is that an actual fact, or just an unsubstantiated statement?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement