Coronavirus Pandemic Information- Local and Worldwide

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Is there any reason for any child who's not in the seriously at risk groups to get the flu vaccine? Having had exposure to multiple strains of the real flu is of benefit to the immune system later on in life

Sure vaccine will expose him/her to many more strains than any years flu will,
It always exposes you to four strains. why make them go through the virus

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

It gives much better and longer lasting immunity to get the actual flu.
In the long-term at a population level, having a large proportion of the population carrying a broader immunity also gives a benefit by reducing the likelihood of very severe outbreaks.

This is not the year for letting children get flu and the upheaval that it brings with testing and upsetting classes. They have a reason for recommending a flu jab for children this year and not every year. `They want to minimise the upheaval in schools.

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

It gives much better and longer lasting immunity to get the actual flu.
In the long-term at a population level, having a large proportion of the population carrying a broader immunity also gives a benefit by reducing the likelihood of very severe outbreaks.

I’ll take advice from public health officials thanks rather than internet physicians.

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

The real world is far more complicated than they give it credit for. At best the majority of public health officials have got a very two dimensional understanding of disease, many not even that unfortunately...

Yea.
So you think you’ve figured our tie complexity of public health that the actual public health professionals haven’t. Will you share your qualifications and research papers and then maybe we can take your public health claims seriously, otherwise I think it’s best listen to the professionals.

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know too many people eager to rush out and get these new vaccines tbh.

If it's made compulsory for international flights and for concert goers....all the anti vac will suddenly disappear..

Deleted User wrote: »

More fodder for my ruminations today. I had a physio appointment and they were asking would I get the vaccination, so we had that conversation about it being rushed and had Govt's let companies off the hook in case anything goes wrong in terms of side effects.

They told me they were seeing lots of "long covid" side effects. Where 10-30% of people contracting covid are experiencing shoulder and chest problems (in particular to a physio) and many other internal organ issues also.

Damned if ya do...

In reality long covid is thought to occur in less than 2% of infections but when you look at the list of symptoms of long covid. The question has to be how much of long covid symptoms are actually caused by restrictions on people's lives.

Similar symptoms can also occur after non covid infections...

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Why not actually consider the point instead of attacking me?

Have studied epidemiology and pests/disease in quite a bit of detail. Was offered a PhD with teagasc but academia didn't appeal to me so I went out on my own but all that is irrelevant to this thread

I’m not specifically attacking anyone.
I appreciate your if the belief you’ve cracked some nugget of public health that all the actual experts seem to have missed.

Public health strategy works by people playing their part and not second guessing decisions and going off on a solo.

The idea to just let people get the flu to gain immunity is as bizarre as letting everyone get covid to gain immunity.

Yes your preventing people who it wouldn’t affect get it. But that’s missing the point. By getting immunisation your into really high numbers we create a buffer of vaccinated people so the virus can’t travel to people not vaccinated, I’m sure I don’t need to explain herd immunity to you.

Letting thing s just run their course isn’t a public health strategy, it’s denial of science and demonstrating a lack of respect to those you will kill along the way, America’s handling of covid is a prime example.

I know you feel nephet has steered us wrong and you know better, but in all likelihood you don’t and everyone should really listen to the professionals rather than stuff on the internet published by got knows who with god knows what hidden agenda.

paddysdream wrote: »

Not directed at anyone in particular but experts have been wrong a fair bit in the last few years.
This total and absolute faith in experts is what has led to a lot of difficulties.
All those expert bankers and economist's about 2007 those expert pollsters in US 4 years ago, David Camerons experts in 2016.
In farming you have the experts who ran the greenfield site
Far as i can see the definition of an expert as one who brings his lunch in a briefcase has never run truer

Public health has eliminated polio, Tb, and a host of other nasties that killed and destroyed the lives of countless Irish citizens. The flu vaccine saves countless from sickness and death every year. We thankfully have lived to see the first tranche of vaccines rolling out in schools to prevent cancers.

No vaccine is 100% safe, none. But regardless vaccination is how covid will be controlled.

Vaccination programs are a central pillar to public health and their effectiveness has been proven over and over across the world.

_Brian wrote: »

I’m not specifically attacking anyone.
I appreciate your if the belief you’ve cracked some nugget of public health that all the actual experts seem to have missed.

Public health strategy works by people playing their part and not second guessing decisions and going off on a solo.

The idea to just let people get the flu to gain immunity is as bizarre as letting everyone get covid to gain immunity.

Yes your preventing people who it wouldn’t affect get it. But that’s missing the point. By getting immunisation your into really high numbers we create a buffer of vaccinated people so the virus can’t travel to people not vaccinated, I’m sure I don’t need to explain herd immunity to you.

Letting thing s just run their course isn’t a public health strategy, it’s denial of science and demonstrating a lack of respect to those you will kill along the way, America’s handling of covid is a prime example.

I know you feel nephet has steered us wrong and you know better, but in all likelihood you don’t and everyone should really listen to the professionals rather than stuff on the internet published by got knows who with god knows what hidden agenda.

Consider though.
You vaccinate a much higher proportion of the population against flu than is currently vaccinated.
Who is going to spread the strains of flu in the vaccine? Very few people. So what you end up with is more selection pressure for the strains not in the vaccine to predominate.
So what will end up happening is that you will end up with a strain of flu that the vaccine does not protect against as we can't vaccinate against all strains.

Scale the above back to only the vulnerable getting vaccinated and you give the strains of flu in the vaccine the best chance of becoming the dominant strains which means that those vulnerable people will have the best possible chance against it.

In reality we're somewhere in between those two extremes and probably get results somewhere between the two with a lot of randomness thrown in that will give years where the vulnerable are protected very well and years when they're given no protection at all.
There is also the factor of natural Vs vaccine immunity access the population. Natural immunity is longer lasting and broader acting. So even though the general population won't have anywhere near full immunity against a fresh strain. They do have the potential to slow spread by being less susceptible to infection and/or shedding lower levels of virus. This occurs without increasing selection pressure for non vaccine strains.
Compare that to someone who has been receiving the vaccine long-term. They will have less long-term broad acting immunity. But because they've been vaccinated, they actually act to encourage further the non vaccine strains.
What you end up doing by over vaccinating against flu is destabilising things over the medium to long-term. Yes you'll get good years with near perfect results but you're also going to encourage many more bad years.

You can see broadly similar strategies to managing worm resistance, GM insect resistance etc. There has to be some element of encouragement for the easily controlled strains to survive or else they will just circumvent your active ingredient, vaccine or whatever other control method you use

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Consider though.
You vaccinate a much higher proportion of the population against flu than is currently vaccinated.
Who is going to spread the strains of flu in the vaccine? Very few people. So what you end up with is more selection pressure for the strains not in the vaccine to predominate.
So what will end up happening is that you will end up with a strain of flu that the vaccine does not protect against as we can't vaccinate against all strains.

Scale the above back to only the vulnerable getting vaccinated and you give the strains of flu in the vaccine the best chance of becoming the dominant strains which means that those vulnerable people will have the best possible chance against it.

In reality we're somewhere in between those two extremes and probably get results somewhere between the two with a lot of randomness thrown in that will give years where the vulnerable are protected very well and years when they're given no protection at all.
There is also the factor of natural Vs vaccine immunity access the population. Natural immunity is longer lasting and broader acting. So even though the general population won't have anywhere near full immunity against a fresh strain. They do have the potential to slow spread by being less susceptible to infection and/or shedding lower levels of virus. This occurs without increasing selection pressure for non vaccine strains.
Compare that to someone who has been receiving the vaccine long-term. They will have less long-term broad acting immunity. But because they've been vaccinated, they actually act to encourage further the non vaccine strains.
What you end up doing by over vaccinating against flu is destabilising things over the medium to long-term. Yes you'll get good years with near perfect results but you're also going to encourage many more bad years.

You can see broadly similar strategies to managing worm resistance, GM insect resistance etc. There has to be some element of encouragement for the easily controlled strains to survive or else they will just circumvent your active ingredient, vaccine or whatever other control method you use

No expertise in science here but this last paragraph aligns with what i believe. We are trying to beat bacteria / virus / worms (cattle )but all we seem to do is encourage ever more resistent varieties. ( Overuse is a problem but I think would happen anyway).
As for experts, a lot of progress has been made in the past by people questioning experts of the day and trying something new.
Didnt experts tell pregnant women to take talidomide (spelling?) in the 70s?

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Those posts seem to contradict eachother about the flu vaccine, maybe we're not talking about the same thing?

Ultimately though every strategy has to be questioned hard. If you put anyone on a pedestal above questioning, all you will end up with is incompetence and poor decisions.
With private business having such an influence on health policy and many health "experts" actually having quite a narrow education with little real world experience, it is especially important to question everything.

And if you give people a reason to opt out whether true or not, they will opt out. Most people are selfish and only care about themselves when it comes down to it.
Next thing you'll here is yosemitesams' children isn't bothering their backsides getting the vaccine so why should ours, and before you know it your school is closed due to covid testing due to flu.
No questioning by you or anyone else is going to be listened to so you might as well suck it up and do as you're asked

greysides wrote: »

How Iceland hammered COVID with science.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03284-3

An enviable position position, small population, good facilities to test and trace, no land border with a nation not taking it as seriously as they should.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/public-health-doctors-overwhelmingly-back-strike-action-over-pay-and-contracts-1.4421560%3fmode=amp

At least the poor public health doctors might benefit from covid. An extra 30-80k a year would be a nice bonus while the economy disintegrates

Good point Wrangler. What I found dealing in another life with both Govn't and LAs was, once an objective was decided upon, no matter what happened or how many years went by, it was always at the top of the file and given any chance that policy was implemented.
Like charging for water, (which I agree with BTW), don't ever think it's shelved permanently.
Increasing the pension age is, part of policy, and is only temporarily postponed.

_Brian wrote: »

As L5 ends at last It will be interesting to see how well we can keep numbers under control.

There’s considerable feeling among folk I’ve been talking to over lately few days that Jan6th will see another L5 lockdown, that’s not an nice thought.

Sure that was said months ago