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

caveat emptor

polesheep wrote: »

And the vast majority of those are in the vulnerable cohort. I have clearly stated that once over 65 AND vulnerable are vaccinated we should begin to open up. If anyone outside of those groups is fearful they should restrict their movements until they get a vaccine.

You are saying it's down to being afraid. If no-one in that cohort is 'fearful' we'd still have overwhelmed hospitals and 4K deaths total. Not including the effect of overflowing ICUs which causes a significant uptake in mortality.

So you think that we should risk 4000 + deaths in under 65s?

You'd make a great WW1 general. Over the top lads !

is_that_so

hynesie08 wrote: »

Meanwhile, we've second jabbed nearly 10% of our vaccinated, despite one less vaccine and the supposed shackles of the EU..... Not bad.

TBH we seem to be the one of the only EU countries with a plan that is responding to supplies, others look to have just gone out jabbing all they can. Nothing wrong with that but it leaves you at the mercy of delays and shortfalls.

pjohnson

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Does anyone actually still think that they will happen?

I'd say Norma Foley does anyway.

polesheep

Gruffalux wrote: »

And in this scenario what do we do with the vulnerable and over 65 if there is a variant that needs a booster shot for vaccination to be effective? (Which there already is...hence the vaccine manufacturers making booster shots already)
Do we shut down again until that next vaccination drive is over? And so on.

We give them the booster. At that point we will be awash with (adaptable) vaccines.

hynesie08

is_that_so wrote: »

TBH we seem to be the one of the only EU countries with a plan that is responding to supplies, others look to have just gone out jabbing all they can. Nothing wrong with that but it leaves you at the mercy of delays and shortfalls.

Shhh, some of us were shouted down for implying that might be the case...... Apparently an online calculator was more reliable.

polesheep

caveat emptor wrote: »

You are saying it's down to being afraid. If no-one in that cohort is 'fearful' we'd still have overwhelmed hospitals and 4K deaths total. Not including the effect of overflowing ICUs which causes a significant uptake in mortality.

So you think that we should risk 4000 + deaths in under 65s?

You'd make a great WW1 general. Over the top lads !

Can you demonstrate how your scenario would come to pass with the vulnerable vaccinated, ongoing vaccinations of the 'healthy' and wild immunity.

tom1ie

I know this may sound counter productive at the moment considering vaccines are in such short supply, but we should be putting a mechanism in for every advanced (1st world) country to start donating 10% of vaccines to 3rd world countries.
Reason being if massive numbers continue to be infected in 3rd world countries this could lead to new strains of covid emerging that could be “immune” to the vaccine which put us back to square one.
Two methods of preparing for this are either making sure everyone on earth gets access to vaccines and or quarantining all travellers into the country for 2 weeks until they test negative.

pjohnson

pjohnson wrote: »

I'd say Norma Foley does anyway.

Yeh, we can pretty much assume that whatever she wants to happen the opposite will be the reality. I feel for her though.....she has a literally thankless job

AdamD

caveat emptor wrote: »

You are saying it's down to being afraid. If no-one in that cohort is 'fearful' we'd still have overwhelmed hospitals and 4K deaths total. Not including the effect of overflowing ICUs which causes a significant uptake in mortality.

So you think that we should risk 4000 + deaths in under 65s?

You'd make a great WW1 general. Over the top lads !

Grand so, lock yourself away for the rest of 2021.

AdamD

tom1ie wrote: »

I know this may sound counter productive at the moment considering vaccines are in such short supply, but we should be putting a mechanism in for every advanced (1st world) country to start donating 10% of vaccines to 3rd world countries.
Reason being if massive numbers continue to be infected in 3rd world countries this could lead to new strains of covid emerging that could be “immune” to the vaccine which put us back to square one.
Two methods of preparing for this are either making sure everyone on earth gets access to vaccines and or quarantining all travellers into the country for 2 weeks until they test negative.

Sending 10% of 1st world vaccines to 3rd world countries would do absolutely nothing to stop new strains emerging. 1st world countries have significantly lower populations overall, sending 10% of vaccines wouldn't even make a dent into 3rd world vaccinations.

caveat emptor

polesheep wrote: »

Can you demonstrate how your scenario would come to pass with the vulnerable vaccinated, ongoing vaccinations of the 'healthy' and wild immunity.

Not my scenario. Someone quoted an IFR of .1% .1% of a big number (<65) is still a big number.

Probably makes sense to vaccinate those more at risk which is what we are doing. Guess we'll find out how it goes.


Like in December when everyone was warning. We were told it would be grand. Then come Jan. "Sure how could we have known"

That's been a proven tactic throughout this pandemic and I don't imagine it'll change.

Happydays2020

AdamD wrote: »

Sending 10% of 1st world vaccines to 3rd world countries would do absolutely nothing to stop new strains emerging. 1st world countries have significantly lower populations overall, sending 10% of vaccines wouldn't even make a dent into 3rd world vaccinations.

Need to invest in manufacturing. Greater supply for all.

is_that_so

AdamD wrote: »

Sending 10% of 1st world vaccines to 3rd world countries would do absolutely nothing to stop new strains emerging. 1st world countries have significantly lower populations overall, sending 10% of vaccines wouldn't even make a dent into 3rd world vaccinations.

Africa is really the only place there might be an issue and that has a population equivalent to China. 10% of 2bn doses is quite a chunk and COVAX are aiming for 2bn themselves.

caveat emptor

AdamD wrote: »

Grand so, lock yourself away for the rest of 2021.

Where did I say that? I'd say put in mandatory hotel quarantine and get on with living.

Lockdowns are a load of sh!te and caused by p1ss poor planning.

• "It can't mutate"
• "You can't get reinfected"
• "EU vaccine rollout will be equitable"
• "schools won't close"
• "It's a casedemic"

I can't control what some have chosen to believe. I'd say choose life....choose a washing machine. etc.

tom1ie

AdamD wrote: »

Sending 10% of 1st world vaccines to 3rd world countries would do absolutely nothing to stop new strains emerging. 1st world countries have significantly lower populations overall, sending 10% of vaccines wouldn't even make a dent into 3rd world vaccinations.

So if the Eu gets 600 million vaccines that’s 60 million vaccines for 3rd world.
Repeat for North America Russia China etc. That makes a hell of a dent.

accensi0n

Miccoli wrote: »

Is Covid a major health concern with 70% of the population vaccinated ?

You said that they have no intention of ever ending restrictions.

Why would they not end restrictions even if 100% were vaccinated and covid was gone?

Turtwig

polesheep wrote: »

Surely you can see that those very low numbers are in contrast to higher numbers among the older and more vulnerable groups... with or without restrictions. Covid mainly affects the elderly and the vulnerable, therefore, when those cohorts are vaccinated we can begin to open up. All of the science and statistics support this reasoning.

Not to the extent you are proposing though.
While it is true that vaccinating the over 65s will reduce the rate of hospitalisation it will not stop them. The consideration then becomes how much can you open up before the non vaccinated cohort clog up the hospitals.

NPHET will be releasing modelling data on this March it'll be very interesting to see what the projections are.

A very important thing to note is that even a modest increase in the reproduction number can lead to a larger explosion of cases. The proportion to which we can open up will not be as much people here, I, wish it to be.

Gruffalux

We get vaccinated also to protect those vulnerable people who cannot get vaccinated. And yet the data is not in on transmission post vaccination.
If there is such a thing as vaccination passports to get on a plane, vulnerable people on a plane who have not been able to take vaccine are not protected if transmission remains a possibility. Negative PCR test to allow flying however has a much better likelihood of protecting vulnerable on that plane.

polesheep

caveat emptor wrote: »

Not my scenario. Someone quoted an IFR of .1% .1% of a big number (<65) is still a big number.

Probably makes sense to vaccinate those more at risk which is what we are doing. Guess we'll find out how it goes.


Like in December when everyone was warning. We were told it would be grand. Then come Jan. "Sure how could we have known"

That's been a proven tactic throughout this pandemic and I don't imagine it'll change.

That IFR includes the vulnerable under 65s who, as I said, will be vaccinated. It doesn't apply.

Gael23

AdamD wrote: »

Sending 10% of 1st world vaccines to 3rd world countries would do absolutely nothing to stop new strains emerging. 1st world countries have significantly lower populations overall, sending 10% of vaccines wouldn't even make a dent into 3rd world vaccinations.

How do we stop new strains?

caveat emptor

polesheep wrote: »

That IFR includes the vulnerable under 65s who, as I said, will be vaccinated. It doesn't apply.

I'm sure it'll help but there'll plenty of unexplainable deaths in there. i.e people who didn't know they were vulnerable. (not diagnosed with a comorbitity)

polesheep

Turtwig wrote: »

Not to the extent you are proposing though.
While it is true that vaccinating the over 65s will reduce the rate of hospitalisation it will not stop them. The consideration then becomes how much can you open up before the non vaccinated cohort clog up the hospitals.

NPHET will be releasing modelling data on this March it'll be very interesting to see what the projections are.

A very important thing to note is that even a modest increase in the reproduction number can lead to a larger explosion of cases. The proportion to which we can open up will not be as much people here, I, wish it to be.

Realistically though the number of over 65s hospitalised post vaccination shouldn't be much different to a flu season. There is no doubt that we will begin opening up once the vulnerable have been vaccinated, it's just a question of degree. As you say, we'll know a lot more by March.

JP Liz V1

Sorry this might be a stupid question but what's the difference between Covid19 and Covid Pneumonia and can you get both?

Hooter23

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not news to RTE though

tigger123

Hooter23 wrote: »

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not on the news though RTE just pick and choose what they want sure...truth matters alright RTE

Where did you see that?

accensi0n

Hooter23 wrote: »

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not on the news though RTE just pick and choose what they want sure...truth matters alright RTE

Out of 94 million? Is that bad?

hynesie08

Hooter23 wrote: »

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not on the news though RTE just pick and choose what they want sure...truth matters alright RTE

Please, present your evidence.

Jim_Hodge

Hooter23 wrote: »

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not on the news though RTE just pick and choose what they want sure...truth matters alright RTE

That's a couple of times you've updated us on both the vaccine deaths and RTE's failure to report them.

As yet you haven't shown any source. Plus, the numbers are statistically insignificant.

There were early reports from the US but

included terminally ill patients anticipated to have only weeks or months to live. After a review, the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety said that the fatalities “are in line with the expected, all-cause mortality rates and causes of death in the sub-population of frail, elderly individuals.”

jackboy

Hooter23 wrote: »

Over 300+ vaccine deaths and 10,000 "adverse reactions" its not on the news though RTE just pick and choose what they want sure...truth matters alright RTE

I know some countries made the mistake of vaccinating individuals with very advanced illness, which was a mistake. Do your numbers of deaths include those cases.

Adverse reactions can be mild also and common for many vaccines, so that doesn’t tell the whole story.

bikeman1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Does anyone actually still think that they will happen?

Not only do I think they will happen, they absolutely must happen. We can’t fail our young people any longer.

We are running whole international corporations remotely now, doing online medical consultations and keeping the show on the road.

LC should be allowed to return with strict guidelines in place. Cancel mid term and Easter holidays and focus on getting the most out of the next few months. Every school has big halls to cover off spacing for the next month while case numbers are still high and the rest of the school are off.

We have this virus a year now, the answer has to be better than - We can’t.