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

That's precisely the message we got about the original vaccine doses. A lot of people are very cynical now when they hear the same thing now about boosters.

It really wouldn't, the vaccines stop us from having to use that capacity in the first place they are literally top of the list from the "things that are needed to run the health service efficiently". The flu vaccine is another example that drastically reduces the spending needed on capacity, in this case, an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

...so what's the big deal? Fair play to anyone that makes the move. Good luck to them.

You're arguing on the safety of the vaccines in this case. Medical professionals and authorities around the world have deemed them safe, billions of people have taken them, trials much larger than normal for medical trials have been ran to determine their safety, we are into very rare side effects that have only been found due to mass rollout and even for them, there is treatment available when they occur vs. a novel virus which can kill people with undetermined long term effects.

"isn't very effective" seems to be your typical refrain and doesn't make sense for a vaccine with a 90%+ chance of eliminating severe disease in people and reducing transmission rates significantly for a highly transmissible virus.

So you want to put vaccines into kids who don't need them to protect people who are vulnerable and will already have taken boosters that is supposed to protect them from serious illness and being hospitalised.

The flu jab is voluntary and kids are more at risk to It than Covid, so I have no problem with kids taking that vaccine.

I have confidence in calling it. If I'm wrong, I'll admit I'm wrong. I've been wrong before...

Name the risks, not all of them obviously, unless you have a very short arm, can you name 5 of the risks for example? Preferably the most serious ones - mild pain at the injection site wouldn't be considered serious

Also trying to find proof that extra doses mean more risks but can't seem to find any scientific proof of that... Did you make it up?

So yes, given what I know, extra boosters is proven to be a good thing

Yes. It would have sounded far-fetched. I didn't think it would happen. That doesn't mean anyone can spout anything on this thread by way of fear mongering and hope it'll stick.

So pissing away €50-60million for absolutely no absolutely proven benefit isn't a bad thing?

Jesus, the cavalier attitude of some on here to the shameful waste of finite recourses is breathtaking. The same lads will be out in their droves in a few years complaining when services are cut to service our debt. Does anyone seriously believe that interest rates will remain this low as infimum? We are fcuked once the rates are risen and there is already talk of inflation in the US and UK.

But yeah, fcuk it lets piss away another wad of cash to be seen to be doing something.

The architects of this will be sitting with a cozy ministerial pension, well insulated from the fall out, when you and your kids are still paying for this nonsense.

I don’t understand people on here saying they won’t be complying if more restrictions/lockdown is introduced. The last thing I want is more restrictions, I’m sick of Covid. But if everywhere is shut down, we will all have to? There will be nowhere to go out to.

Resist how? Nothing has been resisted thus far.

A lot of people around here hate restrictions, but love to cheer on or even engage in the kind of behaviour that brings on restrictions. Go figure...

The people who do follow restrictions are actually doing more to bring about an end to them than all the mouthy bluster you'll read in here.

Also specifically for myo and pericarditis, the risk is greater after the 2nd dose than the 1st - that is, more people suffer these injuries after dose 2 than dose 1. So there may even be something to be said for more vaccinations increasing the risk more than the cumulative risk expected.

I largely agree with a lot of what you say, especially re yer man. I'm not convinced that children are not significant vectors at the moment though. To my layman's thinking, they must be, given how rampant it is in the schools. That's not "putting responsibility" on them, its just an opinion. Even if its a fact, its still not putting responsibility on them, its just they way it is. I'd rather government said that the spread in schools is the price we're willing to pay to keep schools open, or they were even more honest and said we need the childcare that schools provide.

With regard to changing advice, pretty much everyone in the world is learning as they go with this. I'd be more worried if initial beliefs were never changed with new evidence or data. I'd think very differently if our approach wasn't broadly similar to most every other western country, if we were complete outliers, then yeah, I'd be very concerned. Arguing over closing times for pubs (honestly I don't get the midnight thing making any difference) or whether X was closed 3 weeks longer than Y in the summer is pointless IMHO.

Meh, I dunno, I mean, I get that everyone is pi$$ed off with this and the last 2 years, and I'll be the first to say we haven't got everything right with this, but I do think we've got more right than wrong overall. I hate that any reasoned debate is overridden by instinctive name calling and hysterics (not by you) whenever the government or NPHET say anything at all. Like masks for kids, ECDC don't recommend it, yet the CDC in the US do in indoor settings - they can't both be right, can they ? Agreeing or not agreeing with one of those positions doesn't make the other corrupt or incompetent or whatever the latest accusation is.

What risk?