Austria hits panic button.

To be fair, you could apply this logic to any tyrannical society. We're not exactly living in times of openness and debate driven consensus. There was a lad who lost his job for simply questioning government methods a year or so ago, and stuff like that creates fear, and when there's fear people shut their mouths.

OK, you you wrote

And then when challenged for data to support this you wrote

So you made a strong statement of fact and then admitted it was an assumption based on your distrust of authority.

Let me help you out. The most recent report I can find is from RTE yesterday citing CSO data covering Sept and Oct.

I think this is the CSO publication (one day RTE will discover hyperlink technology):

This is only a snapshot and insufficient to establlish a trend (it does contain some time series for cases, but not for hospitalisations and ICU admissions), but it is recent.

Fill your boots.

(apologies that is is unrelated to Austria but it seems all thread discipline has broken down on this forum)

Good to highlight the data. But aren't there some other salient points?

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/br/b-cdc/covid-19deathsandcasesseries36/

• "Almost 84% of those who contracted COVID-19 in September and October and admitted to an ICU had an underlying health condition
• People aged 65 and over accounted for 50% of all those hospitalised through the whole period of the pandemic
• Almost all (97%) of those who contracted COVID-19 in September and October and admitted to an ICU and who reported being vaccinated had an underlying health condition
• Around 28% of those who contracted COVID-19 in September and October and admitted to an ICU were not born in Ireland, and 90% of those reported being un-vaccinated"

This seems to be a very precise issue (still) involving people with underlying conditions. It suggests throwing a blanket over the unvaccinated isn't actually speaking to the problem. Why would people with underlying conditions still be featuring in large numbers? Is there any significance to the the level of non-natives (maybe not, but it was an aspect I was completely unaware of)?

Saying "Over 50% are unvaccinated" (when someone else, incidently, was saying it was 66%) isn't hitting the nail on the head, when we know its overwhelmingly people with underlying conditions. Why are people with underlying conditions still not availing of the vaccine? Not a question I've seen answered by any expert, despite it clearly coming out of the data.

It's bad that the Village Idiot is now the voice of sound reasoning and logic 😛

technically it does... but not in the black and white way you are interpreting it..

will you have person to person transmission who have been vaccinated... of course.... if I sat in a room full of measles patients, even though I've had MMR, I still have a 2 in 5 chance of getting sick with it....

vaccine reduces viral load, it reduces transmissibility, which in turn stops transmission (it will always, like any virus, transmit to some, but the key point is that it doesn't have the free for all to transmit to all)

Lol

Covid will put more in hospital. and in the grave as well

You're wasting your time and energy.

If you presented HSE published figures that were being updated daily, you'd likely be met with two "arguments":

1) George Soros and Bill Gates are behind the fake HSE numbers

2) and anyway, the daily pulished numbers are only a snapshot in time. Probably released at 5pm. They don't prove what the figures were at 4:59pm or 4:58pm or 4:57pm

Again, this isn't really describing what the figures are saying. Just saying "unvaccinated" as if they were all equally at risk isn't reflected what's being experienced.

For instance, nearly half of the unvaccinated ending up in ICU are not Irish born. Non-natives make up less than 20% of national population. So what's the deal? Is there some way in which non-natives are not being reached by the campaign?

Now, probably lots of reasons why people don't want to be caught in public saying "a lot of the problem with unvaccinated in ICU is the non-native population". I suppose we might wonder then why we're, apparently, so willing to demonise everyone who hasn't been vaccinated, just because we don't want to focus on the problem.

And I think folk should bear in mind that other countries looking at mandatory vaccination seem to have lower vaccination rates. It would be interesting to hear what benefit Austria would expect if they got 90% of their population vaccinated.

The consistent message coming from meical experts both here and abroad was twofola. Vaccine would reduce the levels of transmission and more impotantly reduce the severity of disease.

The general consensus now, with more data, is that the effect on transmission was not as good as hoped for, but vaccine are guarding against severe disease. There are very few vaccinated healthy individuals in ICU compared with the same cohort of unvaccinated.

This is a new disease, treatments and vaccines will develop and improve over time. That is how medical science progresses.

A silver lining for Ireland and the difference to Austria. Ireland has relatively few deaths thanks to the vaccination rate. Cases are high but people are not dying at a rate like see here:

Statistics are really dangerous right now as too many people interpret those with tunnel vision.

To add to above post. In Vienna the districts with the lowest vaccinated are those with the highest people from immigration background. Something to tackle

hmmm........you'd almost swear that there is a pattern to those numbers?????

But, then again, I suspect that you got them from "mainstream media" ..... publishing those nice picture is how they get you

Same as what medicine?

I never said anything if the sort let alone think it.