Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

1153315341536153815391580

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Government health and safety guidance was that anyone who could work from home should have been working from home, depending on what restrictions were in place. The vast majority of people were. Schools were closed for long periods and online teaching was in place.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 248 ✭✭maude6868


    I'm fully aware of all this but there was a period of time when I was back in school yet couldn't go to the hairdresser, restaurant or pub. I was waiting to be told either get the vaccine or don't return to work but that never came to pass, thank God. The point still is, we were in front of 100s a day and it was ok according to the Government guidelines yet couldn't get a one on one appointment with a hairdresser. That made no sense. My daughter and niece never stopped working, retail and nurse but again couldn't go to the gym. This was baffling to me at the time and still is.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    It reduced the risk to the hairdresser and people who went there.

    The government could only do so much to reduce the risk while balancing other priorities. And there were measures in place in shops and schools to reduce risk. Measures such as masks and distancing which could not be applied in hairdressers or pubs \ restaurants.

    In a workplace, school, the people you are interacting with are a known set of people daily.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    It doesn't mean they are " useless at preventing infection " !

    This is blatant attempt at misinformation And you the one in a previous post decrying rational discussion and moving of goalposts !

    That is like saying condoms are " useless at protecting against STIs and pregnancy because they are ONLY 98% effective " !



  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]



    They had antibodies to the virus. By definition this means they were infected. And as we all were told ad infinitum, this virus can be spread by asymptomatic people. So therefore they were infectious. And he has no way of knowing if the vaccine helped prevent "a full-flight infection" whatever that means. Plenty of people were infected pre vaccines and didn't develop "full flight infections". 95% infection rate is pretty much useless at preventing infection. That's the reality.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    NO it means they were exposed to the virus.

    They could have been vaccinated in 2021, and infected 12 months later with Omicron. To conclude from that the vaccine is useless at preventing infection, without qualification, is a false and baseless statement.

    So I repeat, where does it state that were infected and infectious?

    You're actually contradicting the comments of the study's principal investigator, which you have zero standing to do so.

    An interpretation you have zero qualifications to make, and you don't even declare it as your own interpretation.

    So you are deliberately misrepresenting the contents of the article and spreading medical misinformation by stating your own interpretation of it as a finding of the article itself.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    When were they infected ?

    At what stage in the vaccination process were they ?

    Did the author of the research come to the conclusions that you are extrapolating here ?

    Did they not say that it shows " how effective the vaccines were in preventing illness" ?

    Why are you twisting the study to prove your own bias / agenda ?

    This is classic distortion and misrepresentation of a study and it is a good study .

    A bit desparate .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Also there were nurses who didn't get vaccinated for various reasons , who were redeployed if they were going to be at risk themselves or deemed a risk to vulnerable patients . Some did administrative work . Others were working in less acute non Covid areas . All had to regularly test afaik.

    I had to step back from front facing duties as I am classed highrisk until I had my full primary course . Then I was back full on.

    Every workplace were obliged to protect their staff and their clients and it wasn't black and white all the time .

    This for you too @maude6868



  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]



    They have to repeat the mantra about the vaccines being wonderful at preventing infection, otherwise it wouldn't get published. However the study's data says no such thing. This study can't say that because there is NO CONTROL GROUP. Plus since 95% of them were infected, it CLEARLY doesn't prevent infection.

    And "at what stage". It says they were VACCINATED, so that's at least 2 shots.

    This is pointless. You believe these vaccines reduce infections by a large degree, despite a mountain of evidence, and massive levels of infection in the population after the booster rollout. Massive levels - levels never seen in any flu season, despite them being "better" than any flu vaccine.

    I'm done here.



  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So they were all vaccinated in 2021 and none of them got a booster? Come on. Cop on to yourself. Most of the booster rollout was just before Omicron. You are telling me in all seriousness that only 2 of 445 weren't vaccinated but of those 443 NONE of them got a booster?

    95% of the participants had an infection at most 6 months prior to the study and practically all of them were vaccinated - this is FACT. It is not misinformation. This level is replicated across the world where it has been studied. The population data shows huge swathes of highly vaccinated and boosted, mask wearing socially distancing populations get infected. Portugal being a good example, but they are anywhere you care to look. By refusing to acknowledge this FACT you are the one spreading medical misinformation.

    Most of those would have had a booster going on national stats, unless they are some weird group who got vaccinated but didn't get a booster - possible but highly unlikely.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    IT's all starting to fall apart really...

    The only thing we can all agree on is that Covid is a nasty infection, probably one rung more serious than a bad flu, in terms of death rates and hospitalisations.

    But that is not what we were led to believe was coming our way in Feb/March 2020.

    We quarantined healthy people.

    We imposed truly unhealthy lock down policies on the entire population, the price of which we are now paying in excess deaths and probably more we are not being told about.

    We were then convinced that the vaccines would stop transmission...which we were, in Sept of last year Nphet were supposed to disband, they wouldn't till after February, Varadkar alluded to the fact that we endured more restrictions in the Spring/Summer of 2021 as way to drive up vaccination rate.

    Natural immunity wasn't allowed to be spoken of, immunity from prior infection wasn't considered, we wouldn't allow children into cinemas with their friends if they weren't vaccinated...

    These have been some very dark years in our history, I take no comfort in reminding people that at this very time our Government are preparing for the next emergency, which will involve restrictions...I wonder how many people will support those (if the restrictions are triggered)!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,502 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The R for SARS-COV2 later variants was estimated at 12-20 in unvaccinated/uninfected population.

    The real world R post vaccination (and with everyone else infected and with some antibodies) with everything open hovers at about 1.

    What "magic" causes that drop in R?

    Why does infectivity drop most soonest after vaccination?

    Why do boosters reduce infection rates in those that receive them?

    If you're going to argue "mountains of data" you have to be prepared to understand what that data means rather than ranting and raving about it.

    Use the data to answer the above in a coherent fashion, if you can.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,502 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Herman Cain says hello ;)

    Untitled Image

    I see the crank websites have fully latched onto this infection statement.



  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    100%. If a virus that is deadly to young healthy people arrives, we are screwed. We will have tens of thousands of deaths FROM - not WITH - the virus before anyone does anything. The trust is completely gone for me, and for many like me. I've always had faith in the medical establishment - not criticising individual medics mind you - but not anymore. Being able to go into a supermarket with thousands of other people, and with the likes of Intel and McDonalds full steam ahead while not being able to do click and collect at a corner shop was the last straw for me.

    And we failed spectacularly in the one place where it would have really made a difference - the care homes.

    It was absolute nonsense. Nothing to do with keeping people safe.

    And I'm not sure we can agree on the seriousness of COVID. Many still think it's a death sentence, or act as if it is.

    And as for the hysteria around monkeypox - absolutely insane.



  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    R hovers around 1? Really???? If by "hover" you mean "swings wildly" then yeah. At that point all your criteria were met for having R hover around 1. There is nothing to say we won't have a similar spike at some point in the future - although with people losing interest in getting tested we are unlikely to notice except in hospital admissions.

    image.png




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Again I disagree .Look when the study was. Had that age group been fully vaccinated and boosted at that time ? It doesn't mention boosters at all . In fact it only mentions in regards to checking to see if antibody levels are waning with the specific antibody tests to see if you need a top up booster which they discuss as preventing illness , not infection .

    The vaccines have had a massive impact on Covid which was KILLING PEOPLE in massive numbers , unlike flu or any other virus around before . There us 'mountains of evidence" to show this , unlike what you are claiming in your post there . If you gave these mountains of evidence to counter this , where is it?

    Yes , there is still a lot of infection around despite the vaccines , and the fact that Omicron is better at evading the vaccines but not causing severe illness is something that has been flagged and discussed by everyone .

    To say that we blindly follow whatever we are told is untrue . You only have to look at threads like this and the Vaccine thread to see that many questions and discussions on the subject have been ongoing . Following research studies and trials . Looking at data from everywhere .

    Don't remember you contributing much but maybe you were following, who knows?

    There are new variants of Omicron around now eg XBB in Singapore which are causing extreme concern as they are mutating again to evade the present vaccines further if they become dominant worldwide , so it is hoped that the bivalent booster will buy us time before we find that the vaccine in its present form is really not effective . Until then at least immunity from Omicron infection and vaccines might get us over a winter wave , if that happens .

    But saying it's useless now and always was is just fingers in the ears stuff...

    So now you're done.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,003 ✭✭✭Stormyteacup


    But did it reduce the risk though? Science showed efficacy waned - enough that many vaccinated in July/August ‘21 were as likely to infect the hairdresser or waiter in November/December as someone unvaccinated. Yet the government persisted in vilifying the unvaccinated.

    There was a small risk that someone unvaccinated would take up a hospital bed should they become seriously ill with Covid, but people take up hospital beds for all sorts of choices they made - separating the unvaccinated, once the science was clear about waning, was completely wrong. The hairdresser and waiter were protected from serious illness if (needed?) infected, if they had opted for vaccination.

    And although not entirely the fault of vaccine manufacturers, if they had claimed the vaccine would ‘halt’ transmission then that would be one thing. But they claimed it would stop transmission, which led to months-long debates about herd immunity through vaccination and what percentage of the population would need to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, when all along it was a unicorn and they knew it, but stood by and watched experts debate about a unicorn;

    Colm Henry in July 2021;

    “What we thought initially, based on much cruder estimates a year ago, based on the wild type Covid we were dealing with last year, it was 60 to 70 per cent of the population [that would reach herd immunity].

    “But because we are dealing with a much more transmissible variant, to reach that concept of herd immunity , which every country is far away from yet, the estimate has gone up to 85 to 90 per cent.”




  • Posts: 2,093 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I never said that the vaccines didn't decrease serious illness and death. I think the data is clear that they did. What I AM saying is the vaccines did little or nothing to prevent INFECTION and TRANSMISSION. The data is even clearer on that. It's really simple - if they actually prevented it we would have had no omicron surge. And to say they worked but the virus mutated around it - well that's what coronaviruses and flu viruses do !!!! Unlike say smallpox for example, they mutate at a much faster rate. Until you have a vaccine that prevents INFECTION and TRANSMISSION against ALL variants, you DO NOT have an effective vaccine against INFECTION and TRANSMISSION. Therefore you are going to get more spikes and R most definitely will NOT hover around 1 as a previous poster alluded to.

    Omicron came out of left field; there is nothing to say the next variant wont either, and render a vaccine designed for Omicron useless against INFECTION and TRANSMISSION; in fact it's guaranteed to be, since most people will have had Omicron.

    It may be that COVID has used up it's space for mutations already and Omicron is it's end state; but we don't know this yet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Yes, of course it reduced the risk. Rather important for those 6 months before Omicron arrived during which vaccine mandates were in place and Delta was in circulation. Not everybody was vaccinated at the same pace. The mandates were in place in high risk environments, the more people vaccinated the lower the risk.

    The unvaccinated were more likely to end up in hospital, ICU and more likely to spread the virus.

    A small risk - from a highly infectious disease, translates into numbers going to hospital. It has always been a numbers game.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,502 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Well, apart from misunderstanding R (R of 1.1 can lead to spikes, that spike is significantly less than R in an unvaccinated population...), I asked you to come with data, and as predicted, you sh*t yourself over it.

    Here's the R data from the UK, take a look at the averages before and after vaccination.

    The R value and growth rate - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

    Take a look at the numbers after full reopening with vaccination vs. in lockdown pre-vaccination.

    Come with the data.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Nah.. you didn't say above , you said they were " useless " , and that the vaccines were worse than the flu vaccines , which we all know is just untrue . Flu vaccines never protect against ALL INFECTIONS AND VARIANTS . This year alone we have a quadrivalent vaccine hoping to protect against 4 strains commonly circulating in SEA and Southern Hemisphere for the last few months , and that may have mutated by the time it gets here . But it is still hoped that some part of it will work to at least reduce severity of infection if not infection, full stop.

    And yet it is classed an effective vaccine .

    And flu is not half the illness Covid is, in infectivity transmission or disease , don't equate them .

    Omicron is mutating constantly . There is an article on the convergence of Omicron mutations in the New Atlas which is not heartening at all. ( My poor tech is not allowing me to post the link directly but here's the link address ...newatlas.com/science/omicron-mutates-convergence)

    I think we should be grateful we have gotten this far with the vaccines we have and let's hope that the scientists can keep working to find an all encompassing solution.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,348 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    But but ..people don't believe that hospital admissions are an indicator either .

    Sure they are all just admitted with incidental infections , aren't they , " With Covid" not " of Covid " ? 🤨/sarcasm



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,927 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    I said people were "coerced and shamed to take them even before they are out of their trials." Thankfully most of that has stopped now, but I suppose it could be brought back again.

    In status reports filed recently with the US federal trials registry (clinicaltrials.gov) between February and May, both companies extended the dates by which the trials will be completed, Pfizer by nine months, from 15 May 2023 to 8 February 2024. Moderna’s expected completion date is delayed from 27 October to 29 December 2022.

    Do you still maintain you are correct and the BMJ is incorrect?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    Phase 3 trials had been completed. Or put it another way all necessary trials for them to be approved for the general public had taken place. All medicines are reviewed after they are approved. Its important to remember they are multiple phases to testing which includes post market review.

    Take this quote from the article


    "Pfizer indicated in its trial protocol that individual participant data would be made available two years after study completion."


    Pfizer have pushed this back and remember the release of this is to independent researchers and not regulatory bodies. It also unclear what exact trials the article is talking about on top of that.

    Your link doesn't say that the vaccines hadn't been tested or received the relevant regulatory approval. Again there are different stages in every trial. Not all of them have to be completed or can be completed before a product is authorised for the general public.

    I think your post is classic Dunning Krueger and confirmation bias. I don't think you actually understand the article or the regulatory process in general. If you look at the top of the article "intended for Medical professionals only". Its intended for a very specific audience who havd a better knowledge of the area. It's also a warning for lay people that they may not be able to understand the topic. This is not unusual for any area of academia.

    The idea that the Covid vaccines didn't undergo the relevant tests is a conspiracy theory simple as. Stand back for a second. These vaccines have been approved independently the heath authorities world wide. That's at least thousands of people that are knowledgeable in the area, have independently looked at the relevant data, understand the approval process(which will vary slightly country to country) and have decided these are safe. Are you honestly saying all these thousands of people are part of one gigantic conspiracy/were fooled? Because that's what your argument boils down to.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    People were not coerced to take them in Ireland. You are posting blatant falsehoods now.

    Nobody had "force or threats" applied to them to get vaccinated.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Varadkar alluded to the fact that the Irish were subject to brutal lock down tactics in the Spring/Summer of 2021 to drive the vaccination rate.


    That is control, the government forced restrictions on the population when there was absolutely no danger to the health system.

    Remember in August 2021 Minister for Health said "hell was about to be unleashed"(about the spread of the virus) and we were all in danger.

    Admittedly, we didn't go as far as Canada but lets be honest here, whose leader called the unvaccinated "racist/misogynists etc", Canada is in control of an authoritarian leader...we don't want to be copying China, North Korea, Canada, California etc...highly controlled societies, do we?

    How many health workers were sacked in the US/UK/Europe? In the middle of a pandemic...

    We imposed restrictions on unvaccinated children!!! That is sick!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,517 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Is there a conspiracy theory in there?

    Are there any actual facts?

    The post is just a diatribe.

    If people hadn't been vaccinated, when the next covid wave hit, the consequences for the health service would be severe. See Hong Kong.

    So why do think it was done?

    Do you accept that vaccination provides significant protection against severe covid?

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 91,696 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    From the Mirror


    Health officials have issued a stark warning over the latest sub-variant of Omicron to be detected as it spreads across the globe.

    Omicron Spawn,’ which is also known as BF.7 and BA.5.2.1.7 was included in the latest update from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


    The CDC warned on Friday that the newest strain can evade all existing immune responses to Covid-19 as well as vaccines, as many countries prepare for a difficult winter.

    No matter what people tell you, words and ideas can change this World



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    If you think there is a conspiracy theory in there at least have intellectual honesty to point it out rather than using your passive aggressive tone that merely seeks too undermine my opinion.

    I absolutely accept that the annual flu shot gives protection to the weaker immune systems in our society, which in turn helps the health system cope during flu season.

    Do you accept that children and people with healthy immune systems have no need to take a flu shot every flu season?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭Doc07


    What restrictions were imposed on unvaccinated children in Ireland?



Advertisement