The Pat Kenny Show

Cole

Cole wrote: »

His slot on the show is usually excellent, but I'm pretty sure his actual performance of the song is pre-recorded (I'm open to correction)...the quality of his line to Pat usually improves dramatically when he starts singing.

Still really good though.

He's definitely not singing that down the same phone line that he was just chatting to Pat on..."in your own time, Paul"...yeah right Pat.

Still excellent as always though.

readyletsgo

Yeah his song is always pre-recored and sent in to play after the chat.

Butson

Either way, a fantastic singer and a nice change of pace for morning radio.

No offence to Newstalk journalists but the quality of these 'reports' is almost inevitably very, very weak. Lazy, sometimes.

There's a very noticeable contrast in quality between Pat and these filler items.

Cole

readyletsgo wrote: »

Yeah his song is always pre-recored and sent in to play after the chat.

I don't know why Pat tries to stick with the pretence ("take it away, in your own time, Paul") when nobody actually believes it live. And nobody really cares...we can still just enjoy a great version of a well known song.

EmmetSpiceland

Cole wrote: »

I didn't catch his name but this teachers union guy is really poor...not doing much to convince a sceptical listener.

They’ve been doing more damage to the “public opinion” of teachers than usual.

I’ve a mate who’s a teacher, doesn’t agree with them at all. Would like to get vaccinated before they go back in September but that’s it.

SNAs, particularly those in special needs schools, should definitely be getting the shots before “regular” teachers.

The unions are just doing what they always do. Out for what they can get, not what is fair. Would be great if the younger teachers, whom they left behind, decided to leave but, in the case of primary teaching, they are “hamstrung” due to the Union being the teachers only form of HR.

Cole

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

They’ve been doing more damage to the “public opinion” of teachers than usual.

I’ve a mate who’s a teacher, doesn’t agree with them at all. Would like to get vaccinated before they go back in September but that’s it.

SNAs, particularly those in special needs schools, should definitely be getting the shots before “regular” teachers.

The unions are just doing what they always do. Out for what they can get, not what is fair. Would be great if the younger teachers, whom they left behind, decided to leave but, in the case of primary teaching, they are “hamstrung” due to the Union being the teachers only form of HR.

Yeah they do seem to have a genuinely strong case.

Technocentral

I'm much, much more terrified of long covid than the vaccine, this condition or conditions needs to be published much more.

EmmetSpiceland

Technocentral wrote: »

I'm much, much more terrified of long covid than the vaccine, this condition or conditions needs to be published much more.

I missed most of this “piece”. It sounds awful but weren’t Pat and Luke O’Neill talking about it recently and saying it’s not a lifelong condition, it does go away?

Or is it not a case that a small percentage of those infected will end up with a lifelong illness?

Technocentral

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I missed most of this “piece”. It sounds awful but weren’t Pat and Luke O’Neill talking about it recently and saying it’s not a lifelong condition, it does go away?

Or is it not a case that a small percentage of those infected will end up with a lifelong illness?

Not enough time passed to be sure, but it's something the anti vaxxers don't seem to care about at all.

Roger_007

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I missed most of this “piece”. It sounds awful but weren’t Pat and Luke O’Neill talking about it recently and saying it’s not a lifelong condition, it does go away?

Or is it not a case that a small percentage of those infected will end up with a lifelong illness?

Most the ‘evidence’ of long Covid that is being put in the public domain seems to be anecdotal and the term ‘long Covid’ seems to cover a multitude of different symptoms in different people.
Has there been no proper research done on this?

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I missed most of this “piece”. It sounds awful but weren’t Pat and Luke O’Neill talking about it recently and saying it’s not a lifelong condition, it does go away?

Or is it not a case that a small percentage of those infected will end up with a lifelong illness?

I think 'Long Covid' is just a brand name for what is generic post-viral fatigue, like you might get after a bad case of glandular fever. It's one of those disorders that has always been regarded with suspicion, even among doctors, as perhaps all being psychological. With so many Covid patients now showing up with the same symptoms, maybe post-viral fatigue will finally be taken a little more seriously.

Nobody seems to know if long covid will behave the same way as other post-viral fatigue, but I have two neighbours who got a virus (perhaps glandular fever) many years ago, maybe 20 years ago, which developed into chronic fatigue. They never recovered, and went from being active students to mainly bed-bound; their parents are now their full-time carers. Both guys can barely stay awake long enough to eat their lunch. Obviously that's an extreme reaction, and there is a whole spectrum.

Either way, I agree with the person who said they dread long covid. The potential side-effects are just too great.

generalgerry

Technocentral wrote: »

I'm much, much more terrified of long covid than the vaccine, this condition or conditions needs to be published much more.

I guess the difference is that any evidence the media can dig out about so called Long COVID will be amplified as it helps them to keep the country scared and locked down. Any evidence of vaccine injury will be buried, and people will have to fight tooth and nail to get any sort of compensation, same as they did with the Swine Flu vaccine and HPV vaccine. Never mind the long term effects of the vaccine which nobody has any clue what will be.

dulpit

generalgerry wrote: »

I guess the difference is that any evidence the media can dig out about so called Long COVID will be amplified as it helps them to keep the country scared and locked down. Any evidence of vaccine injury will be buried, and people will have to fight tooth and nail to get any sort of compensation, same as they did with the Swine Flu vaccine and HPV vaccine. Never mind the long term effects of the vaccine which nobody has any clue what will be.

humberklog

Anyone else think that the Teacher Union fella (ASTI?) got a bit of a lemoner when Pat pointed out that even if teachers were moved up a few notches on the vaccine list they'd still only be fully vaccinated towards the end of the summer school holiday?

There was a brief silence from the Union guy and I thought he was "doing the math" and realising his optimism for a Vaccine Passport to his Gite in the Dordogne was now drifting off out to sea..."Wilson! Wilson!"

humberklog

humberklog wrote: »

Anyone else think that the Teacher Union fella (ASTI?) got a bit of a lemoner when Pat pointed out that even if teachers were moved up a few notches on the vaccine list they'd still only be fully vaccinated towards the end of the summer school holiday?

There was a brief silence from the Union guy and I thought he was "doing the math" and realising his optimism for a Vaccine Passport to his Gite in the Dordogne was now drifting off out to sea..."Wilson! Wilson!"

No, he pointed out to Pat that his logic only applied to the Astra Zeneca vaccine. And even then, they would have immunity in time for schools re-opening in September. That's good. We shouldn't want teachers bringing the virus into schools in the Autumn, or passing it around various classes, but that's probably going to happen.

Some teachers probably won't be fully inoculated until Christmas.

There are good arguments against vaccinating teachers and SNAs as a priority group, but I don't think Pat's point is one of them.

Surely they will be vaccinated by September. Aren’t we moving to 1 million a month? Screw the AZ.

HBC08

If there is a strike as i understand it would be after the summer, by that stage a lot teachers will have had a first jab at least.
Whilst they are rightly p1ssed off i think the anger is clouding their judgement and they're definitely not going to look good out of this.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Surely they will be vaccinated by September. Aren’t we moving to 1 million a month? Screw the AZ.

One million a month, yes, but excluding those who get J&J, that's only 500k people. Almost half of the Autumn recipients will be repeat vaccinations.

I havent been following the updates, but from what I gather from radio interviews, everyone will be offered a first dose by September. That means it will be well into Autimn and even Christmas before everyone benefits from a second dose (+2 weeks for immunity)

In our family, and plenty like us, family members who are in their 40s will probably be vaccinated 2 months before teacher siblings — who have nearly 1000 student interactions a week. Maybe it's a fast way to do things, I doubt it's best practice.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

One million a month, yes, but excluding those who get J&J, that's only 500k people. Almost half of the Autumn recipients will be repeat vaccinations.

I havent been following the updates, but from what I gather from radio interviews, everyone will be offered a first dose by September. That means it will be well into Autimn and even Christmas before everyone benefits from a second dose (+2 weeks for immunity)

In our family, and plenty like us, family members who are in their 40s will probably be vaccinated 2 months before teacher siblings — who have nearly 1000 student interactions a week. Maybe it's a fast way to do things, I doubt it's best practice.

if everybody gets a first dose by September 1st then it’s two weeks later that the population is fully vaccinated. if everything is working.

We should be at herd immunity well before that anyway.

Your family members who are teachers and not over forty are at no personal risk.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your family members who are teachers and not over forty are at no personal risk.

It's not so much about teachers' personal welfare. It's about schools as origins of transmission. I think we all have our suspicions on that front. Schools are known to be risky. The potential for super-spreaders is enormous, especially since many teachers, to comfort their students, just cannot wear masks (at primary level). Ventilation is completely archaic, social distancing isn't possible.

If NIAC are certain that the right thing to do is not to prioritise guards and teachers, then let's go with that. But we should see the written rationale.

jay0109

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's not so much about teachers' personal welfare. It's about schools as origins of transmission. I think we all have our suspicions on that front. Schools are known to be risky. The potential for super-spreaders is enormous, especially since many teachers just cannot wear masks for their pupils' benefit (at primary level)

If NIAC are certain that the right thing to do is not to prioritise guards and teachers, then let's go with that. But we should see the written rationale.

Are schools known to be risky? NPHET stats that I've seen seem to show very little cases in % terms coming from schools.
I'm quiet sure that if the Unions had evidence or hard cases to publicise, they would be shouting even louder than they are now.
And they certainly do need some serious backup because they're making themselves look very bad, especially in the past few weeks

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's not so much about teachers' personal welfare. It's about schools as origins of transmission. I think we all have our suspicions on that front. Schools are known to be risky. The potential for super-spreaders is enormous, especially since many teachers, to comfort their students, just cannot wear masks (at primary level). Ventilation is completely archaic, social distancing isn't possible.

If NIAC are certain that the right thing to do is not to prioritise guards and teachers, then let's go with that. But we should see the written rationale.

If the schools are major spreaders then parents are more vulnerable. They hug their kids. Let’s see.

jay0109

jay0109 wrote: »

Are schools know to be risky? NPHET stats that I've seen seem to show very little cases in % terms coming from schools.

Do you believe that?

Obviously, if you limit the definition of close contacts, and you never classify an asymptomatic patient as a vector of disease, children/schools seem safe.

Pat Kenny, to his credit, had been very sensible in highlighting the absurdity of how disease is deliberately not traced back to schools. In our local town, the amount of households getting covid where the kids are attending school is becoming a joke. I'm sure we are not unique.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If the schools are major spreaders then parents are more vulnerable. They hug their kids. Let’s see.

Again, this is not about the personal risk to young teachers. It's about transmission.

A teacher at post-primary engages with hundreds of pupils per week – that's hundreds of households.

A parent, working from home, interacts with 0 additional households.

This is not complicated mathematics.

NPHET/NIAC will probably give us excellent reasons why the teachers and guards should not be prioritised, but it will probably be based on the fact that the HSE just cannot manage, or identify, a list of frontline workers.

jay0109

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Do you believe that?

Obviously, if you limit the definition of close contacts, and you never classify an asymptomatic patient as a vector of disease, children/schools seem safe.

Pat Kenny, to his credit, had been very sensible in highlighting the absurdity of how disease is deliberately not traced back to schools. In our local town, the amount of households getting covid where the kids are attending school is becoming a joke. I'm sure we are not unique.

In the school my kids go to, there has been instances of covid. Brought in by kids from outside of school contacts and not passed tpo anyone else in the school...2 of my kids were in classes impacted (at different times in the past few months) and had to isolate at home while the school continued on.
There was no transmission by those kids to classmates or Teachers.
The kids in question who had Covid were back to school after a few weeks.

I'm sure we're not unique either

meeeeh

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

If NIAC are certain that the right thing to do is not to prioritise guards and teachers, then let's go with that. But we should see the written rationale.

Don't you think government would want to avoid all the upset from different interest groups? Surely they didn't change the priority list for less efficient option just before union conferences so they can deal with 2 weeks of uproar?

There is a difference between being at risk of catching Covid and being at risk of getting seriously sick and dying from Covid. Even if you exclude the nursing home deaths where cocooning is hard overwhelming number of deaths and hospital admissions are in the age group that minded themselves most. Pensioners who don't need to work in crowded environments.

BTW I caught only parts of the interview but to me it seemed that Pat was just making sure benefits of mass antigen testing are mentioned. It is a subject he rarely mentions.

jay0109

jay0109 wrote: »

In the school my kids go to, there has been instances of covid. Brought in by kids from outside of school contacts and not passed tpo anyone else in the school...2 of my kids were in classes impacted (at different times in the past few months) and had to isolate at home while the school continued on.
There was no transmission by those kids to classmates or Teachers.

How do you know?

Schools aren't even told, if nobody is deemed by the HSE to be close contacts (often excludes asymptomatic cases, ie kids) Kids apparently just disappear out of class and a teacher will later find out the household had a positive covid test. There is no requirement to inform the school.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

Don't you think government would watch avoid all the upset from different interest groups? Surely they didn't change the priority list for less efficient option just before union conferences so they can deal with 2 weeks of uproar?

No, I strongly suspect that it will be quicker to vaccinate based on age.

But then, tell us that. Tell us, also, that the HSE isnt able to manage the approach that follows medical evidence, that this is beyond their wit. We deserve to know how the system works, or doesn't. Let's see how the sausages are made.

meeeeh

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, I strongly suspect that it will be quicker to vaccinate based on age.

But then, tell us that. Tell us, also, that the HSE isnt able to manage the most medically-sensible approach, that this is beyond their wit. We deserve to know how the system works, or doesn't.

Which is the most medically sensible approach?

(WHO claim the fastest one.)