Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings

SAMTALK · 04-03-2021 02:49PM

Hellrazer wrote: »

RTE news headline is that the effect of the vaccine on healthcare workers has been "phenomenal"

This alone should give everyone a reason to celebrate or even look at loosening some restrictions sooner.

If the effect is the same in the nursing homes and in over 85s then it should be game over for the virus and as such the lockdowns should go with it.

However all we hear about are new variants this and new variant that.

People seem to think the goal of a vaccine is to eradicate covid when in reality its to stop serous illness and deaths and it looks like thats exactly what the vaccines are doing.

I really cant see Tony allowing the loosening up until we have huge amounts of the population vaccinated and thats where the politicians need to grow the spine you are talking about.

Yes we might have to live with covid and some people getting seriously ill and hospitalised but as long as its not killing people then we should be good to open things up.

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

Hector Savage · 04-03-2021 02:50PM

normanoffside wrote: »

So because he is interviewed on gript, nothing he says is valid?
Maybe he is voicing his opinion on Gript because no one of the mainstream media will let him him has his voice there.

I don't want Gript to be the voice of the people but none of the mainstream channels are allowing people like him or me to voice their frustrations.

ah yes, thanks for bringing it up, that's another way people dismiss it ... "It's on XXX publication"

XXX are unreliable because they lean _____.

So if the Daily Mail has an article explaining how the earth orbits the sun is it bollox ?

Hector Savage · 04-03-2021 02:51PM

SAMTALK wrote: »

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

No NPHET want to eradicate the virus.

Big difference

Captain_Crash · 04-03-2021 02:51PM

DenMan wrote: »

It's full relaxation mode for Conor McGregor and his no mask shop in Kildare.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/conor-mcgregor-buys-his-whiskey-without-wearing-mask-in-kildare-store-1090903.html

Perfect example of what our society's become!! The amount of people with nothing better to do other than piss and moan at him not wearing a mask.

Social media is a competition for who can be the most outraged!!

04-03-2021 02:53PM

Hector Savage wrote: »

No NPHET want to eradicate the virus.

Big difference

There is a lot of equating NPHET and ISAG going on. NPHET have not proposed eradication as a strategy

SAMTALK · 04-03-2021 02:53PM

Hector Savage wrote: »

No NPHET want to eradicate the virus.

Big difference

Have they actually said this ?

04-03-2021 02:55PM

DenMan wrote: »

It's full relaxation mode for Conor McGregor and his no mask shop in Kildare.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/conor-mcgregor-buys-his-whiskey-without-wearing-mask-in-kildare-store-1090903.html

"Dickhead in being Dickhead shocker"

growleaves · 04-03-2021 02:56PM

Hector Savage wrote: »

ah yes, thanks for bringing it up, that's another way people dismiss it ... "It's on XXX publication"

XXX are unreliable because they lean _____.

So if the Daily Mail has an article explaining how the earth orbits the sun is it bollox ?

If there's a reliance on guilt by association that is very weak.

There are all sorts of rhetorical tricks that can be pulled out of a hat.

This is why I placed Boggles on Ignore because he will waste your time by simply going from one rhetorical sleight of hand to another. You could waste days, weeks, months, years with this stuff.

Once a point has been made, people of good will (i.e. excluding a few of the regulars on this thread) can make what they will of it.

Boggles · 04-03-2021 02:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

This "quote" you keep wheeling out like a stuck record is inaccurate, and you should stop using it lest the extremely tiny minority of people here who still think you're a legitimate voice change their mind.

Fix your ****.

Really?

Well by all means please offer citation that the Commissioner has been misquoted.

Boggles · 04-03-2021 03:01PM

growleaves wrote: »

If there's a reliance on guilt by association that is very weak.

There are all sorts of rhetorical tricks that can be pulled out of a hat.

This is why I placed Boggles on Ignore because he will waste your time by simply going from one rhetorical sleight of hand to another. You could waste days, weeks, months, years with this stuff.

Once a point has been made, people of good will (i.e. excluding a few of the regulars on this thread) can make what they will of it.

Just for clarity, he placed me on ignore because I pointed out he was linking to anti vax rallies.

Hellrazer · 04-03-2021 03:02PM

SAMTALK wrote: »

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

No it should be get as many vulnerable and old people vaccinated as soon as possible. Not going down the road of the death rate argument again because raind will no doubt hunt me down and probably kill me if we start that again.
And we cant keep going around in circles.

I think everyone whether you are pro or anti lockdown is in agreement that vaccines are the solution to do this pandemic. Its the way they are rolled out is the issue.

JDxtra · 04-03-2021 03:04PM

SAMTALK wrote: »

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

Yes, you would think that - but they seem to want everyone on the planet vaccinated before taking their foot off the neck of Ireland. The new bogeyman is "the variants".

PTH2009 · 04-03-2021 03:04PM

Leo really can't keep his gob shut, another interview

timmyntc · 04-03-2021 03:04PM

SAMTALK wrote: »

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

No, because our normality is at odds with public health.
NPHETs goal is as little death as possible - 0 if they could. They do not care for the economy or for concepts such as personal freedoms, it's simply not in their remit.
This is why they should only advise, the political decisions should be made by our elected politicians.

Graham · 04-03-2021 03:05PM

SAMTALK wrote: »

Surely from NPHETs point of view this is the sole aim

Get as many vaccinated to prevent as many deaths as possible, and when majority done the country should be able to get back to some sort of normality

Makes sense to me.

That's pretty much the UK approach that everyone was cheering on a few days back.

SAMTALK · 04-03-2021 03:09PM

timmyntc wrote: »

No, because our normality is at odds with public health.
NPHETs goal is as little death as possible - 0 if possible. They do not care for the economy or for concepts such as personal freedoms.

Where have they stated this though ?

Is their job not to deal with the Pandemic ?

Gael23 · 04-03-2021 03:15PM

There are 107 in ICU so we should be on target to hit the 50 Varadkar mentioned by Easter

Boggles · 04-03-2021 03:16PM

Hellrazer wrote: »

I think everyone whether you are pro or anti lockdown is in agreement that vaccines are the solution to do this pandemic.

Well that's not strictly true.

There is a tiny minority in Ireland who are anti restrictions because they are anti vaccines.

Unfortunately they are quite a vocal minority.

normanoffside · 04-03-2021 03:19PM

Boggles wrote: »

Well that's not strictly true.

There is a tiny minority in Ireland who are anti restrictions because they are anti vaccines.

Unfortunately they are quite a vocal minority.

Actually I'd say those people are Anti Lock Down and Anti Vax, Not anti-lockdown because they are anti Vax.

I agree they are a minority thankfully as it's the only way out of this as far as I can see.

04-03-2021 03:19PM

Graham wrote: »

Makes sense to me.

That's pretty much the UK approach that everyone was cheering on a few days back.

I'm not so sure about that, Moderator Graham.

The UK, even if vaccinations were not as high as they are now, would presumably have led with easing restrictions far earlier than us anyway - as precedent has shown.

Boggles · 04-03-2021 03:35PM

normanoffside wrote: »

Actually I'd say those people are Anti Lock Down and Anti Vax, Not anti-lockdown because they are anti Vax.
.

Nope, they are anti lockdown because they want the virus to spread to reach the herd immunity folly, so vaccines won't be needed.

timmyntc · 04-03-2021 03:38PM

Boggles wrote: »

Nope, they are anti lockdown because they want the virus to spread to reach the herd immunity folly, so vaccines won't be needed.

That is just ridiculous.
They are anti-lockdown because they dont want restrictions on what they can/cant do. The anti-lockdown position is not some bizarre conspiracy to institute herd immunity so a few people wont have to get a jab - only in walter mitty land

Graham · 04-03-2021 03:38PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK, even if vaccinations were not as high as they are now, would presumably have led with easing restrictions far earlier than us anyway - as precedent has shown.

So you think they're deliberately dragging thing out now vaccinations are as high as they are now?

Not the presumption I would have made.

Boggles · 04-03-2021 03:42PM

timmyntc wrote: »

That is just ridiculous.
They are anti-lockdown because they dont want restrictions on what they can/cant do. The anti-lockdown position is not some bizarre conspiracy to institute herd immunity so a few people wont have to get a jab - only in walter mitty land

The Anti Vax crowd are anti restrictions because it stops the spread of the virus, they are just not anti covid vaccine, they are against all vaccines.

It's in their "literature", which largely stems from the States, It's not my opinion.

ingo1984 · 04-03-2021 03:44PM

Boggles wrote: »

Well that's not strictly true.

There is a tiny minority in Ireland who are anti restrictions because they are anti vaccines.

Unfortunately they are quite a vocal minority.

They are doctors who took an oath on the preservation of life. They want as less deaths as possible.

Governments job is to acknowledge this in relation to their advice and weigh it up against other economic, social factors.

Boggles · 04-03-2021 03:50PM

ingo1984 wrote: »

They are doctors who took an oath on the preservation of life. They want as less deaths as possible.

What oath?

Doctors speed up the demise of people all the time, they do it for the greater good but it is an occupational hazard for surgeons.

04-03-2021 03:57PM

Boggles wrote: »

The Anti Vax crowd are anti restrictions because it stops the spread of the virus, they are just not anti covid vaccine, they are against all vaccines.

It's in their "literature", which largely stems from the States, It's not my opinion.

A general anti-vaccination stance is different from skepticism about mRNA vaccines based on their entirely absent long-term safety profile.

It is possible to not want to be part of the long-term safety testing group for a new technology while also believing that 1: vaccines are generally good, and 2: the new technology, if safe in the long-term, will be a boon for human medicine going forward.

There are plenty of people being called "anti vaxxers" at the moment who are prepared to take AZ, J&J and the other vaccines that have been made using older, more tested technology, who just won't take Pfizer or Moderna until it has a 5-10 year record of safety.

Covid vaccination in children will be a harder sell. Mortality rate from Covid-19 in the under 9s seems to be around 0.0016% right now. That's 1.6 in 100,000. The potential for anaphylactic response with any given vaccine is around 1 in 1,000. So you're asking people to intentionally inject their children with a substance that is only marginally less risky to them than a virus they may never contract, and which has no long-term safety profile. (Edit: see corrections by other posters further along in this thread)

SAMTALK · 04-03-2021 04:04PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that, Moderator Graham.

The UK, even if vaccinations were not as high as they are now, would presumably have led with easing restrictions far earlier than us anyway - as precedent has shown.

You can only presume though .

I would imagine the aim in most countries is to get as many people vaccinated as soon as possible.

Numbers were high in Jan / Feb and it makes sense to have a strict lockdown and get numbers as low as possible and try get as many vaccinated as possible as soon as possible ( whether this is achieved is another argument )

04-03-2021 04:07PM

Deleted User wrote: »

A general anti-vaccination stance is different from skepticism about mRNA vaccines based on their entirely absent long-term safety profile.

It is possible to not want to be part of the long-term safety testing group for a new technology while also believing that 1: vaccines are generally good, and 2: the new technology, if safe in the long-term, will be a boon for human medicine going forward.

There are plenty of people being called "anti vaxxers" at the moment who are prepared to take AZ, J&J and the other vaccines that have been made using older, more tested technology, who just won't take Pfizer or Moderna until it has a 5-10 year record of safety.

Covid vaccination in children will be a harder sell. Mortality rate from Covid-19 in the under 9s seems to be around 0.0016% right now. That's 1.6 in 1,000. The potential for anaphylactic response with any given vaccine is around 1 in 1,000. So you're asking people to intentionally inject their children with a substance that is only marginally less risky to them than a virus they may never contract, and which has no long-term safety profile.

No its not - and you claim its not anti vax.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4783279/

Boggles · 04-03-2021 04:14PM

Deleted User wrote: »

There are plenty of people being called "anti vaxxers" at the moment who are prepared to take AZ, J&J and the other vaccines that have been made using older, more tested technology, who just won't take Pfizer or Moderna until it has a 5-10 year record of safety.

Really, who are they?

The reality is in parts of Europe at least is AZ has reputational damage for one reason or another and people are insisting on getting Pfizer or Moderna.

Deleted User wrote: »

Covid vaccination in children will be a harder sell. Mortality rate from Covid-19 in the under 9s seems to be around 0.0016% right now. That's 1.6 in 1,000. The potential for anaphylactic response with any given vaccine is around 1 in 1,000. So you're asking people to intentionally inject their children with a substance that is only marginally less risky to them than a virus they may never contract, and which has no long-term safety profile.

And there we are, straight out of the anti vax playbook.

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings