Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

MerlinSouthDub

Harry Palmr wrote: »

50% of children 0-17 get the flu jab in the USA and it's up to 60% effective.

So many who get the flu clearly never got inoculated, others were but got the flu before it became effective (two weeks).

In 2017 374 died between 0 and 15 years of age. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_09-508.pdf

Would you deliberately infect your children with seasonal flu if there was no vaccine

No one deliberately gets anyone infected. It's a case of balancing the risks. With covid, the risks for children are less than for the flu, even with a flu vaccine.

niallo27

caveat emptor wrote: »

Sweden changing tune regarding lockdowns.
Why would they need them if they are immune?


https://twitter.com/thereal_truther/status/1308830873425506306?s=20

Try posting something positive, some good news. See how you feel after it.

ACitizenErased

niallo27 wrote: »

Try posting something positive, some good news. See how you feel after it.

You and I know that will never happen

The Assistinator

Gael23 wrote: »

The number of cares in Donegal today would be like Dublin reporting 1000 cases a day in proportion of population

Frightening statistic

I think you might want to do the math again.

DangerScouse

caveat emptor wrote: »

Sweden changing tune regarding lockdowns.
Why would they need them if they are immune?


https://twitter.com/thereal_truther/status/1308830873425506306?s=20

That's going to annoy a few on here.

caveat emptor

niallo27 wrote: »

Try posting something positive, some good news. See how you feel after it.

Try posting something informative
or try posting without using the words positive or negative.

It's as if we are discussing a battery.

ACitizenErased

'Sweden may implement' is as good as saying I 'may' get hit by a bus tomorrow. Doesn't lay down anything concrete.

Sweden was found to be wearing no clothes. Can't wait for the explanations. It will probably have something to do with Glynn, knowing them.

pjohnson

niallo27 wrote: »

Try posting something positive, some good news. See how you feel after it.

ACitizenErased wrote: »

You and I know that will never happen

Some people prefer facts to fantasy.


When theres nothing positive theres nothing positive. No altering facts/omitting numbers or fairytales required.

AUDI20

ACitizenErased wrote: »

You and I know that will never happen

So True I have yet to see a positive post on here yet from any poster

caveat emptor

ACitizenErased wrote: »

'Sweden may implement' is as good as saying I 'may' get hit by a bus tomorrow. Doesn't lay down anything concrete.

If you say so. Nothing to do with the fact their diabolic epidemiologist has changed his stance? Think that is news worthy.

Sweden's state epidemiologist has said that he is now willing to recommend lockdown measures such as school closures, and strict limits to the size of gatherings -- so long as they are only imposed locally and for three weeks at a time....

Happydays2020

Lads. We have two weeks to sort things or else we will be locked down for six months.

Goldengirl

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No one wants their child to get sick, but for the average healthy child is going to be far less impacted by Covid than multiple other infections

No.
You don't know that.

If even 0.5% of children infected develop longterm complications it is too much of a risk.

What impact is OK for anybody?
Who is to say it is alright for any body's child to become infected?

We are the adults here I hope and surely we should be first trying to protect our children and then our loved ones and ourselves from an illness we still know very little about.

ACitizenErased

pjohnson wrote: »

Some people prefer facts to fantasy.


When theres nothing positive theres nothing positive. No altering facts/omitting numbers or fairytales required.

Ah yes like the lies they posted about reinfection which I eventually debunked. Facts, right.

jackboy

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

And a death rate per capita 40% more than here.

They had serious issues in nursing homes at the start. We are well into the pandemic at this stage. All countries have adjusted their strategies. It’s the death rates in the last two to three months that is relevant

pjohnson

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Ah yes like the lies they posted about reinfection which I eventually debunked. Facts, right.

But not like the time you were telling people to ignore "outliers" as they made things bad.

Not exactly a paragon of facts and truth.

Spiderman0081

caveat emptor wrote: »

Sweden changing tune regarding lockdowns.
Why would they need them if they are immune?


https://twitter.com/thereal_truther/status/1308830873425506306?s=20

When Anders Tegnell and FHM states new recommendations may be used in a very localized manner, it magically translates into the word “lockdown”.

podgeandrodge

Deleted User wrote: »

https://twitter.com/C1aranMurray/status/1308767945624035328?s=20

While acknowledging that pcr isn't mentioned in the article as others have pointed out (but stated by the person that posted the article), it's an interesting development. If Belgium moves in this direction it's bound to be followed by some other countries.

petes

ACitizenErased wrote: »

'Sweden may implement' is as good as saying I 'may' get hit by a bus tomorrow. Doesn't lay down anything concrete.

You posted something earlier from the press conference that I believe had the word 'may' in it without even listening to the rest!

Zebra3

Polar101 wrote: »

No, but the young people aren't isolated from the rest of the population. That's the point.

This claim is what we are actually debating.

caveat emptor wrote: »

Dr Henry: “No evidence yet of sustained immunity making herd immunity Very risky.”

Dr Nolan: “ a lot of young people will have to die to reach it”

So where is the evidence that a lot of young people will die in this scenario?

Did Nolan give an actual estimate and reasoning for reaching such a number?

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

If you say so. Nothing to do with the fact their diabolic epidemiologist has changed his stance? Think that is news worthy.

Basically what we are doing. Local and situation based

spookwoman

Factchecker! pmsl

Non solum non ambulabit

screamer wrote: »

Yes, but your whataboutery doesn’t change the facts on their population density and single occupancy homes.

Besides, I really believe the biggest differentiator is their attitude to the expert advise, which they follow to the last. Not like Ireland where everyone knows better

I only corrected your deliberate misrepresentation

caveat emptor

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Ah yes like the lies they posted about reinfection which I eventually debunked. Facts, right.

You mean when I linked to a peer reviewed study about other coronavirus' that showed on average people getting reinfected every two years with the 4 circulating corona virus'

You said it's not covid but missed the point. The point was why would we thing that we would have durable immunity to this novel coronavirus.
There are plenty of virus' where herd immunity doesn't exist. The only other circulating coronaviruses show regular reinfections.

Do we really think this coronavirus is the exception to the rule. That's the strategy? Really?

Great debunking.

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1305605844013203456?s=20

Goldengirl

Goldengirl wrote: »

No.
You don't know that.

If even 0.5% of children infected develop longterm complications it is too much of a risk.

What impact is OK for anybody?
Who is to say it is alright for any body's child to become infected?

We are the adults here I hope and surely we should be first trying to protect our children and then our loved ones and ourselves from an illness we still know very little about.

Yes we do. Thankfully children are less impacted by Covid than even flu.

MerlinSouthDub

Goldengirl wrote: »

No.
You don't know that.

If even 0.5% of children infected develop longterm complications it is too much of a risk.

What impact is OK for anybody?
Who is to say it is alright for any body's child to become infected?

We are the adults here I hope and surely we should be first trying to protect our children and then our loved ones and ourselves from an illness we still know very little about.

Our children get infected with all sorts of bugs and viruses all the time. Many of these may be new stains, and we know as little (or less) about them as COVID. We do know that COVID has a tiny mortality rate in children. It is lower risk for children than many other infections.

CiarraiManc

caveat emptor wrote: »

You mean when I linked to a peer reviewed study about other coronavirus' that showed on average people getting reinfected every two years with the 4 circulating corona virus'

You said it's not covid but missed the point. The point was why would we thing that we would have durable immunity to this novel coronavirus.
There are plenty of virus' where herd immunity doesn't exist. The only other circulating coronaviruses show regular reinfections.

Do we really think this coronavirus is the exception to the rule. That's the strategy? Really?

Great debunking.

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1305605844013203456?s=20

So I guess that torpedoes the magic vaccine by the year's end then? Lockdown and restrictions are here to stay?

podgeandrodge

Belgium Prime Minister Sophie Wilmès:

From 1 October, face masks will only be mandatory in crowded places, as well as on public transport and in cinemas, for example. “It is useless to make masks compulsory anytime, anywhere,” Wilmès said, calling on local authorities to comply with the change, and not keep the rule in unnecessary places.


Above would suggest that a mask running in for a pint of milk might be considered a tad ott in Belgium from now on.

spookwoman

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes we do. Thankfully children are less impacted by Covid than even flu.

It's not that simple.
Using 2016 numbers 0-18 there would be 6258.98 with long term complications. We already have a system where children are waiting years to see specialists etc for existing problems. Dump that number on an existing overstretched service and there will be deaths.
Even with .05% having complications that does not take into account the lack of existing icu beds for children that would need them while they are infected and needing medical treatment.

MerlinSouthDub

spookwoman wrote: »

It's not that simple.
Using 2016 numbers 0-18 there would be 6258.98 with long term complications. We already have a system where children are waiting years to see specialists etc for existing problems. Dump that number on an existing overstretched service and there will be deaths.
Even with .05% having complications that does not take into account the lack of existing icu beds for children that would need them while they are infected and needing medical treatment.

Why do you think that COVID will cause more long term health problems than other infectious diseases (many of which are more deadly than COVID to children)? There is zero evidence to support that view.