Covid 19 Part XXXII-215,743 ROI (4,137 deaths)111,166 NI (2,036 deaths)(22/02)Read OP

landofthetree

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

And it should be poorer parts of the world that are being left behind that they give them to, not Europe.

They will be offering us vaccines if we need them.

They will want the CTA to have herd immunity.

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

I wouldnt trust the english atal......sucking upto them for vaccines.

Give them something to hang over you,and they'll use it well into the future and bojo is among the most scheming dangerous,self-serving politians to emerge in western europe in decades

Malcomex wrote: »

Add to that useless

While I agree with Blaaz on first point, if they are useless what are our lot. I acknowledge the efforts of all the vaccinators. I'd have more of an issue with the pie chart.

Also what will happen when UK fully vaccinated and we are not. Would they implement checks again from here?

Blue Badger

Random question here, but does anyone know what the reason is as to why the tracker app doesn’t show total deaths or graph them over time? It only shows confirmed numbers over time and the daily death total.

Am I being daft and missing something in the app?

Another thing I wondered is why they don’t showcase remaining ICU bed capacity. It’s good seeing the total ICU numbers but no context is provided.

Polar101

marno21 wrote: »

Between AZ, Pfizer, Moderna, Novavax and Janssen, the UK have ordered 247m vaccine doses, of which 30m are Janssen, which means they can vaccinate 138.5m people with their allocation

They will have surplus and as they are likely to be the first in Europe to complete they will likely need a home for those additional ones.

Yes, but once they're done, it's unlikely they'll have 125 million (or whatever) vaccines stored up - the main thing stopping everyone from vaccinating their population is the limited production capabilities. As production ramps up, more vaccines will be available for everyone. Later this year it's likely most European countries will be at a similar stage in their vaccination projects, so the option to snatch up some leftover UK vaccines won't be relevant. Because either we won't need them, or they won't have them.

Malcomex

Polar101 wrote: »

Yes, but once they're done, it's unlikely they'll have 125 million (or whatever) vaccines stored up - the main thing stopping everyone from vaccinating their population is the limited production capabilities. As production ramps up, more vaccines will be available for everyone. Later this year it's likely most European countries will be at a similar stage in their vaccination projects, so the option to snatch up some leftover UK vaccines won't be relevant. Because either we won't need them, or they won't have them.

Its a little unseemly the west snapping up all the vaccines and closing the borders to the unvaccinated regions where new variants arise

Money talks

bilston

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

And it should be poorer parts of the world that are being left behind that they give them to, not Europe.

I hear this a lot, but surely the parts of the world worst hit should get it first which seems to be Europe, North America and South America.

spookwoman

Sorry report late due to migraine
tonights HSE operations report is in the bottom sheets.









Kildare should be 8429 +54 Cases

Bubbaclaus

bilston wrote: »

I hear this a lot, but surely the parts of the world worst hit should get it first which seems to be Europe, North America and South America.

How do we know how badly poorer nations have been hit? They don't have the healthcare system, testing capacity or tracking/reporting systems to know that.

I'd take another good few months with severe lockdown to be honest if it meant a more equitable distribution of vaccine.

NeuralNetwork

landofthetree wrote: »

The EU havent any deal for it.

Except they do:

https://biopharmajournal.com/2021/01/27/novavax-inc-nasdaqnvax-enters-covid-19-vaccine-supply-deals-with-the-eu-and-new-zealand/

"Also, the European [Union] Commission has finalized talks with the company for the supply of 200 million doses of NVX-CoV2373. According to the terms of the deal, the EU will initially secure 100 million doses of the vaccine with the option of buying another 100 million doses. This will be the seventh deal that the commission has entered with drugmakers for the supply of the COVID-19 vaccine."

There's also considerable progress on the manufacturing side with Novartis now looking at assisting other companies to maximise production and Sanofi has already agreed to produce an aditional 100m doses of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine.

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/u-s-eyes-manufacturing-tie-ups-to-boost-covid-19-vaccine-supply-via-defense-production-act

Things will move quite rapidly as the weeks go on and stuff starts to fall into line.

Ficheall

cena wrote: »

Here is a question. Is it a doctor's duty to let people if there has been a breakout of covid in a small village that they live and work in?

No, it's more important to protect people's privacy than to protect others from covid, apparently.

marno21

The Novartis move above is one of those unpredictable positive curveballs that will help accelerate this overall process.

It’s bleak right now because the short term prospects are bleak. But as ducks start to fall in a row this will start speeding up in ways we can’t imagine right now. It’ll be over before we know it

Hopefully they’ll start including protection against the E484K mutation now also which will insure us against the South African variant.

patnor1011

marno21 wrote: »

The Novartis move above is one of those unpredictable positive curveballs that will help accelerate this overall process.

It’s bleak right now because the short term prospects are bleak. But as ducks start to fall in a row this will start speeding up in ways we can’t imagine right now. It’ll be over before we know it

Hopefully they’ll start including protection against the E484K mutation now also which will insure us against the South African variant.

This may work.
Of course there is also possibility of another 2 or more variants every year. Then it may start to look like never-ending story.

Bubbaclaus

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

If this isn't a pisstake, that's an awful prickish email to send.

I disagree - and it isn't a "pisstake".

Nolan should focus on the detail that matters. Journalists can enquire about more intimate details, if needed.

Nolan hogs up the limelight with his half-lecture, monotone speeches.

Quite frankly, I think he's the most boring speaker I've ever heard in my life. You're almost left reaching for the whiskey after the first three minutes.

But even if he's dull as dishwater, he shouldn't hog up the briefings with 25-minute speeches as if he's back at Maynooth delivering some lecture.

DraftDodger

Mimon wrote: »

Newstalk now are on about the virus uptake or rather the lack of uptake. Lot worse in deprived areas and by ethnic minorities. Social media and the accompanying dumbing down of the populace is a serious blight on society.

My wife works in a care facility and got the vaccine last week. Out of the the 24 members of staff dealing directly with patients 6 refused to take the vaccine. 4 of those are from affluent areas of Dublin and 2 from not so affluent or what one may call deprived.

There are stupid ignorant people from all sectors of our society.

is_that_so

NeuralNetwork wrote: »

Nobody's arguing that they are automatons.

In fact, in my post I was trying to explain the rather horrendous situation that we find ourselves in where we have a need to prevent a virus spreading and emotional and social need and those two are in conflict.

The virus is just a simple parasite that just sees us as raw material and habitat. There is no politics or emotion to it. If you bring people together it will hop host to host. You have to take steps to prevent that happening.

We have the insight and intelligence to understand what the virus is and how it operates. That's what defines us as humans rather than automatons. We need to use that great evolutionary gift of being able to understand what is going on and explain it to our whole population or we are going to keep walking into this again and again.

Until we get the vaccine rollout to a scale and the risks reduced, this is just the reality of what we are stuck with.

The situation is horrible, hurtful and contrary to what is our most basic instinct - to come together in a crisis, but that's where we are.

If we can't get our heads around that at this stage, I really don't know what to make of it.

Well, isn't this condescending! Supposed reason with a good lashing of censure and judgement, otherwise known as why can't people be as smart as me?! We could be, I guess, if we all had the same high horse to lecture from!
Worry about your own life and stop imagining you have any answers for everyone else.

wadacrack

DraftDodger wrote: »

My wife works in a care facility and got the vaccine last week. Out of the the 24 members of staff dealing directly with patients 6 refused to take the vaccine. 4 of those are from affluent areas of Dublin and 2 from not so affluent or what one may call deprived.

There are stupid ignorant people from all sectors of our society.

Probably better to respect people opinions on it. If their young and don't want to take the vaccine that's understandable considering its never really been used outside of clinical trials. No Vaccine is good for your body. Personally I will take it , but I won't be putting up selfies and delighted etc.

Turtwig

DraftDodger wrote: »

My wife works in a care facility and got the vaccine last week. Out of the the 24 members of staff dealing directly with patients 6 refused to take the vaccine. 4 of those are from affluent areas of Dublin and 2 from not so affluent or what one may call deprived.

There are stupid ignorant people from all sectors of our society.

There may well be very legitimate reasons why a person doesn't take the vaccine. Need to be careful before we toss labels on people.

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

Probably better to respect people opinions on it. If their young and don't want to take the vaccine that's understandable considering its never really been used outside of clinical trials. No Vaccine is good for your body. Personally I will take it , but I won't be putting up selfies and delighted etc.

There is no need to respect the opinion of something based on some bizarre alternate reality where millions of people have not already recieved the vaccine.

Your line on "no vaccine is good for your body" is frankly bizarre

wadacrack

Deleted User wrote: »

There is no need to respect the opinion of something based on some bizarre alternate reality where millions of people have not already recieved the vaccine.

Your line on "no vaccine is good for you body" is frankly bizarre

Its not bizarre at all. Most scientists would agree. Its about weighing up the benefits and risks and then yea for me its worth the risk of taking the vaccine. Their lots of people reporting side effects. People are way too divisive on vaccines as it is

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

Its not bizarre at all. Most scientists would agree. Its about weighing up the benefits and risks and then yea for me its worth the risk of taking the vaccine. Their lots of people reporting side effects. People are way too divisive on vaccines as it is

Side effects are the immune system producing antibodies. Antibodies are good.

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

Its not bizarre at all. Most scientists would agree. Its about weighing up the benefits and risks and then yea for me its worth the risk of taking the vaccine. Their lots of people reporting side effects. People are way too divisive on vaccines as it is

Vaccines are no different from any other medicines - namely, that they can cause side effects.

There's this creepy idea that somehow vaccines should never cause side effects, but that every other form of medicine almost necessitates side effects.

It's weird!

How many people would abstain from taking an antibacterial on the basis that "it has mild side effects"?

Next to none.

There are no "anti-antibacterialists" or "anti-antifungalists" or "anti-antihypertensiveists" - but vaccines are seen through the prism of something altogether sinister.

Weird, creepy, pseudointellectual nonsense.

That's not to say there are legitimate reasons not to take a vaccine. However, these prohibitions already exist with current vaccines, too.

Cluedo Monopoly

How is Friday again already!? And how is January over so quickly??

Time flies when you're having fun?

wadacrack

Yea its pretty difficult to have a proper conversation on vaccines without people labelling obvious statements etc. Have studied health related science You what Im talking about and I don't want to appear condescending but when your body experiences side effects its not good. Anyway I have been largely in favour of vaccines so hopefully they can help society get back to normal.

wadacrack

Yea its pretty difficult to have a proper conversation on vaccines without people labelling obvious statements etc. Have studied health related science You what Im talking about and I don't want to appear condescending but when your body experiences side effects its not good. Anyway I have been largely in favour of vaccines so hopefully they can help society get back to normal.

titan18

I know my work are already talking on no vaccine means you're not allowed in the office when we're back (which will be ages anyway). I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of places do the same

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

Yea its pretty difficult to have a proper conversation on vaccines without people labelling obvious statements etc. Have studied health related science You what Im talking about and I don't want to appear condescending but when your body experiences side effects its not good. Anyway I have been largely in favour of vaccines so hopefully they can help society get back to normal.

This is not true.

You are confusing side effects with adverse effects.

Adverse effects are often unexpected and negative, and can sometimes result in hospitalization. Adverse effects are always negative.

Side effects can be either positive or negative. For example: patients taking an antihistamine to manage their allergy symptoms but the drug can cause sedation. This sedative effect is a side effect, but is a positive effect for many patients as it can help them sleep at night.

Your broad-brush statement that side effects are always bad is simply not true.

I could give other examples, but this is sufficient for now.

wadacrack

Deleted User wrote: »

This is not true.

You are confusing side effects with adverse effects.

Adverse effects are often unexpected and negative, and can sometimes result in hospitalization. Adverse effects are always negative.

Side effects can be either positive or negative. For example: patients taking an antihistamine to manage their allergy symptoms but the drug can cause sedation. This sedative effect is a side effect, but is a positive effect for many patients as it can help them sleep at night.

Your broad-brush statement that side effects are always bad is simply not true.

I could give other examples, but this is sufficient for now.

The side effects reported with Covid are negative.

About 63 percent felt fatigue, 55 percent had headaches, 38 percent had muscle pain, 32 percent had chills, 24 percent had joint pain and 14 percent reported fevers.

mandrake04

wadacrack wrote: »

The side effects symptoms reported with Covid are negative.

About 63 percent felt fatigue, 55 percent had headaches, 38 percent had muscle pain, 32 percent had chills, 24 percent had joint pain and 14 percent reported fevers.

FYP

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

The side effects reported with Covid are negative.

About 63 percent felt fatigue, 55 percent had headaches, 38 percent had muscle pain, 32 percent had chills, 24 percent had joint pain and 14 percent reported fevers.

That wasn't the point you made.

You said that when the body experiences side effects, it's a bad thing. That's not true.

Now you have moved the goalposts to the symptoms of COVID-19, and the side effects of a vaccine.

That's a separate question and people have to decide for themselves, true. But the health risks of continued COVID-19 infection due to lockdown coupled with individual risk from the virus itself, appears to excellent evidence in favour of taking a vaccine that has relatively mild side effects - a demonstration, if anything, that the vaccine is working because the mRNA (in the case of Pfizer and others) is triggering an immune response.

If anything, I'd want to experience those side effects for precisely that confirmatory reason.

It's a small price to pay.

And most people who are given the vaccine experience nothing to very mild effects.

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

The side effects reported with Covid are negative.

About 63 percent felt fatigue, 55 percent had headaches, 38 percent had muscle pain, 32 percent had chills, 24 percent had joint pain and 14 percent reported fevers.

These are normal vaccine reactions. It is what happens when the immune system responds. I for one would always be wondering did the vaccine "take" if I did not experience at least a very mild effect. They are not a chemical that just sits there waiting for the virus. The purpose of a vaccine is to trigger an immune response