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

The nytimes articles limits to 3 (unless you go cookie clearing), but the risk seems to be highest for post pubescent males, the doctors mention studies but I ran out before finding the source data:

Covid-19 and Children: How Often Do Vaccines Cause Heart Problems? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Who made the new strain? For what reasons? What is the end goal?

Did anyone publicly or on the forums deny that new strains would come into existence?

There isn't enough data on omicron so far but signs from Pfizer indicate the current vaccine would be fine albeit at lowered efficacy, what's your prediction so it's on record before being officially announced?

You have to have your head right up your arse at this stage to be still coming out with conspiracy theorist jibes.

But then a lot people believe that identity politics is an issue for someone else.

Is there anything to be said for another vaccine?

Because these ones appear to be utter shite.

Honestly at this stage I feel completely deceived. Get vaccinated and we all get back to normal, we mostly do and we start introducing more restrictions.

We've numerous reports coming in that this strain doesn't appear to be worse and we've governments crapping themselves.

Now it seems tomorrow hulahoop is going to recommend more restrictions. I mean what in the actual ****?

Quick, people are starting to think for themselves.. remove their choice

Poe's Law strikes again...

So, I see NPHET models confirm that vaccines give waning immunity while previous infections give permanent immunity.

I don't understand therefore why recovery certs should last for only 6 months nor why previously recovered people should ever get a vaccine.

Ya, they've pretty much rode roughshod over it so far, so I wouldn't take that bodily autonomy stuff as them being unable to do mandatory vaccinations.

I think you lost your compass a bit. Its a conspiracy theory when its outrageously unlikely and requires some strange mental gyrations for its prediction. Whether you believe it will happen or not is one thing but its hardly in the crazy stuff corner still.

Don't like some of the early noises from NPHET. Hospitality for the boosted only is on the cards I reckon.

Chief medical officer Dr Tony Holohan said Nphet would be meeting on Thursday to consider whether further restrictions were necessary, “mindful of Delta and the uncertainty around the Omicron variant”.

“If we could see extensive use of the vaccine pass, whether mandated or voluntary, all of that would give us greater assurance in relation to protection and prevention of transmission,” he said.

The government allows it, that's the main issue for me.

The Government nowadays is the Cabinet, and even then a subset of that group for many key issues.

That's an even bigger issue in itself.

It suits them to hide behind NPHET. It avoids them having to make any decisions and absolves them of any responsibility.

NPHET has been established with such a narrow frame of reference and stuffed with a narrow band of 'experts'. it is guaranteed to spit out a simple answer to every question around Covid - 'more restrictions'

The Government don't want to be presented with a range of options - then they'd have to make a decision and do the job they're paid to do - govern.

I can already hear the testimony in the future tribunals which will be set up to investigate the chronic mismanagement of the response to Covid - "We were following the best advice available".

Meanwhile Dr Tony and his nodding dogs will just say they were only ever 'advising.'

They'll all sail off on cushy pensions and nobody will ever be held accountable.

Meanwhile our Grandkids will be still paying back the bill for this nonsense.

On Freedom of movement

Article 40.4 states that “no citizen shall be deprived of his personal liberty save in accordance with law"

Meaning legislators can make it law that you have to stay within 2 or 5km of your home, similar to the constitutionality of MHQ where people can be stuck in a hotel room

On the right to a livelihood.

Article 45.2 states that the citizens (all of whom, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood) may through their occupations find the means of making reasonable provision for their domestic needs.

That, in a nutshell, is why the PUP exists. The 350/week is considered "reasonable provision"