Covid 19 Part XXXIV-249,437 ROI(4,906 deaths) 120,195 NI (2,145 deaths)(01/05)Read OP

caveat emptor

robbiezero wrote: »

Link - Where are vintners saying that they want to open up indoors now?

Yeah they are not saying that now. It's morphed into "we need a coherent roadmap' to offer guidance on when the pub sector is scheduled to reopen"

In fairness it's very tough for them. I'm not sure if the supports are enough.

https://twitter.com/hospitality_irl/status/1379356442877165572?s=20

Apologies I got confused with last year.

https://twitter.com/VFIpubs/status/1322207479149826049?s=20

Wolf359f

caveat emptor wrote: »

But do member states have the power to require them? People will scream "Against EU law!"

So who has the power then ? Nobody I guess. Seems like a legal gap. Much like mandatory hotel quarantine issue before courts.

I assume member states are free to enact law's that don't breach EU law.
People can be asked and refused admission to a pub without an ID, does that breach EU law?

OP was referring to restrictions being eased for vaccinated people (shops/businesses) I know travel restrictions and travel passports are an entirely different scenario.

is_that_so

rusty cole wrote: »

alot of vegans and gym goers really care about what goes into their body plus they are the cohort who are least affected. Gyms would be cutting themselves out of business if they ask to see certs. I'd wonder how many gym goers will dive on the vaccine train also if you're not due to be vaccinated until after gyms open, how would you feel knowing your gyms open potentially months and you cannot use it.

It is an industry that can be very price sensitive and it is quite tough to hold repeat business. TBH gyms already have a tried and tested regime they can open with. Personally like the booking app and think it was a good forced innovation!

CoronaBlocker

is_that_so wrote: »

Yeah, but its primary aim will be for travel and tourism.

That's where it starts, yes.

Turtwig

rusty cole wrote: »

alot of vegans and gym goers really care about what goes into their body plus they are the cohort who are least affected. Gyms would be cutting themselves out of business if they ask to see certs. I'd wonder how many gym goers will dive on the vaccine train also if you're not due to be vaccinated until after gyms open, how would you feel knowing your gyms open potentially months and you cannot use it.

Gyms actually operate of the premise that you become a member and don't use their services. The larger chains would give serious consideration to something like this. A cynical marketing push to attract the high risk groups into a 'better' lifestyle. Get their subscriptions. Job done.

Wolf359f

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

- Biden's spokesperson said it won't happen on a state level but corporate America is heavily in discussion about it - I posted a story from Yahoo Finance about it the other day.
- Oz has been essentially denying entry to their own citizens for over a year now. They and NZ live in a support bubble - you really think they're going to let that go of that control easily?
- The EU has countries that are preventing travel by enforced quarantine so a document allowing people to circumnavigate those two weeks could be very real.

Years ago documents for vaccinations were slips of card (I had one for yellow fever and rabies) but Covid 19 vaccines card will be electronic, full of data and linked to servers so it's very, very different from what they used to be - and the currency they will have on the black market will be enormous too - so they come with an already glued-on massive criminal incentive and opportunity.

Christ, has no one else considered any of this or are you all just sleep walking around the place? Think it through for god's sake!

You're talking about shops restricting people entry based on a vaccine passport (not a travel one), I was discussing that. Travel vaccine passports are entirely different and will have to be carefully implemented.
There's no point talking about OZ and NZ in respect of people not being able to attend events or pubs without a vaccine cert, as they are pretty much open.

Has there been any confirmation that we will be using vaccine cards and confirmed they will be all electronic and not just the card you receive from the vaccine center. Yes some will copy them, some will use others, but by and large the majority will not. The more and more people who become vaccinated in Ireland, the less and less important vaccine certs become.

accensi0n

Leftwaffe wrote: »

I have no trust in the government to reach the vaccine targets and once we do it will...

Once we reach the targets that you don't believe we will reach... Huh?

BlondeBomb

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

I believe over 65s will be registering for vaccination online on the week of 12 April.

I think it’s 19th now.

caveat emptor

Wolf359f wrote: »

I assume member states are free to enact law's that don't breach EU law.
People can be asked and refused admission to a pub without an ID, does that breach EU law?

OP was referring to restrictions being eased for vaccinated people (shops/businesses) I know travel restrictions and travel passports are an entirely different scenario.

The question is would a vaccination green pass a la Israel be against EU law?

If so then it's no beuno. The vintners will probably be pushing this as it's the quickest route back to pulling pints.

CoronaBlocker

Wolf359f wrote: »

You're talking about shops restricting people entry based on a vaccine passport (not a travel one), I was discussing that. Travel vaccine passports are entirely different and will have to be carefully implemented.
There's no point talking about OZ and NZ in respect of people not being able to attend events or pubs without a vaccine cert, as they are pretty much open.

Has there been any confirmation that we will be using vaccine cards and confirmed they will be all electronic and not just the card you receive from the vaccine center. Yes some will copy them, some will use others, but by and large the majority will not. The more and more people who become vaccinated in Ireland, the less and less important vaccine certs become.

We're talking about everything here. These cards may be introduced for travel but they may be required for lots of other functions too (even by individual businesses in some cases - regardless of the law). It's very naive to not consider that before consenting to them.

And I'd bet my house on them being an electronic card - the world doesn't do paper anymore.

You sound very blasé about nefarious and criminal activity here. Don't forget that this is a global pandemic and it could be years until other parts of the world see any jabs at all. So overlooking the value of these things to the black market could be wildly naive.

Again, it's clear that on here, that many, many people never think about this sort of stuff.

Banana Republic 1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Does anyone know how many over-65s are remaining to be vaccinated?

It's game over as far as I'm concerned once over 65s are vaccinated. They are responsible for 92% of deaths.

Vulnerable people under 65 can continue to self-isolate, if they wish.

The rest of us can then get on with the rest of our lives.

Does that mean you won’t raise your ugly head in this place anymore after that date ?

Folks are banking on about the HSE and Leo working on vaccine passports and then wondering why others get upset.

Well here's the prince of self press openly apologising to sick and dying women for "Deceit and humiliation" only because he was found out by the way.. remember that, Deceitful by their own admission.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/1022/1084851-cervicalcheck-health/

Here's the same government saying they'll go "as far as it takes" to get an ID card which is required for services other than that which they claim it was for. They actually clashed with the DATA protection commission in this regard..so they proclaimed they new more than the appointed commission who is charged with protecting our rights when it comes to data and biometric tech use.

https://www.thejournal.ie/psc-doherty-committee-4900577-Nov2019/

And remember this is the same Leo who is under criminal investigation it seems.. The relationship between science and medicine will always be an issue but the relationship between Govt using Big tech to exploit the covid situation, that's what people are fearful of from what I hear anyway.

I simply would not buy a car from that man, based on his track record..he may give his best mate a copy of my NCT before hand anyway

CoronaBlocker

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Does that mean you raise your ugly head in this place anymore?

Didn't think personal insults were ok on here.

podgeandrodge

"France said under 55s who received a first injection of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine should be given a jab from a different producer for their second dose, a ruling affecting more than 500,000 people."

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0409/1208729-coronavirus-global/

CoronaBlocker

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Does that mean you won’t your ugly head in this place anymore after that date ?

Two goes at it and it's still not right.

Banana Republic 1

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

Didn't think personal insults were ok on here.

It’s not an insult. I take that when the over 65s are vaccinated you’ll still continue posting despite your announcement that your done at that point.

CoronaBlocker

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

It’s not an insult. I take that when the over 65s are vaccinated you’ll still continue posting despite your announcement that your done at that point.

You referred to someone's ugly head. How is that not an insult?
And I never said anything about the over 65s... think you are mixing people up unfortunately.

podgeandrodge

podgeandrodge wrote: »

"France said under 55s who received a first injection of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine should be given a jab from a different producer for their second dose, a ruling affecting more than 500,000 people."

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0409/1208729-coronavirus-global/

Mix and match!! What a mess.

is_that_so

gansi wrote: »

Mix and match!! What a mess.

Not really, AZ were looking at testing it but I don't know what stage they are at on it.

greenheep

gansi wrote: »

Mix and match!! What a mess.

That's mad, there has been no trials trying these two different vaccines together

CoronaBlocker

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

Does that mean you won’t raise your ugly head in this place anymore after that date ?

Third time's a charm! Well done!

Banana Republic 1

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

You referred to someone's ugly head. How is that not an insult?
And I never said anything about the over 65s... think you are mixing people up unfortunately.

I see what your doing CoronaBlocker or should I say Gustav Von Trollington. Your tactics include replies to posts that aren’t directed at you in order to confuse people into thinking your original OP and then gaslight them.

MerlinSouthDub

gansi wrote: »

Mix and match!! What a mess.

There are actually some phase 1/2 studies which show this might give a better immune response than 2 doses of either vaccine.

CoronaBlocker

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

I see what your doing CoronaBlocker or should I say Gustav Von Trollington. Your tactics include replies to posts that aren’t directed at you in order to confuse people into thinking your original OP and then gaslight them.

Are usernames not enough for you then?
Re the rest of your post... oooooookay!

Mods?!

Faugheen

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

Didn't think personal insults were ok on here.

Didn't think saying "tough luck" to medically vulnerable people waiting for a vaccine was ok anywhere but I see you have conveniently ignored that.

CoronaBlocker

Faugheen wrote: »

Didn't think saying "tough luck" to medically vulnerable people waiting for a vaccine was ok anywhere but I see you have conveniently ignored that.

1) I didn't say it.
2) That was a point of view, not a personal insult directly to a user here.
3) Why are you defending personal insults? Are you ok with them here?

Faugheen

CoronaBlocker wrote: »

1) I didn't say it.
2) That was a point of view, not a personal insult directly to a user here.
3) Why are you defending personal insults? Are you ok with them here?

1. Never said you said it.
2. It's a disgusting point of view of so many people who contribute to the economy.
3. I'm not defending personal insults. However I do think saying 'tough luck' to medically vulnerable people is a much worse statement to make than calling someone a poo poo head.

How do you know the poster wasn't taken aback by the statement made about medically vulnerable people? Do you know anything about that poster? Do you know their situation?

People react in different ways for different reasons. Some legitimately, some shamefully. Saying 'tough luck' to medically vulnerable people is shameful and if the worst reaction the poster gets is being called an 'ugly head' then I think he's well able to manage.

I had initially read it as to mean an ugly personality rather than looks. I think making a statement like that about medically vulnerable people is a very ugly one to make.

JDD

It's not a question of whether vaccinated people have anything to fear from unvaccinated in a pub, or whether people under 65 who are concerned about catching the virus while they wait for their vaccination should be protected by ongoing lockdowns or any of that nonsense.

It's about hospitalisations.

If we have all over 65s vaccinated, and all 18-64 high risk individuals vaccinated, and then let the virus be transmitted freely in a completely opened society for a period of say, five months, what will the impact be on hospitalisations? Of course the majority of hospitalisations are over 65s and high risk individuals, so once they are taken out of the equation, and the R number rises to 4-5, what are the chances that lots of younger people with no underlying conditions end up in hospital, and is it at a rate that for a period of six weeks or so that hospitals will be able to cope?

I am sure that the HSE have modelled this scenario, with various models depending on the level of opening and on best and worst case scenarios for vaccine deliveries.

I suppose there is, conceivably, a situation where this so called ramp up in deliveries may not meet our expectations. And in that scenario, coupled with completely opening retail and hospitality, we may find that hospitalisations of healthy younger people overwhelm the hospital system.

Of course if vaccines are delivered on schedule it may only be a short window when infections are high. Or, if vaccines don't arrive on time but we don't open completely, we can keep the R number down below 2 or 3 so again that window of high infections is slower to get to and spread out over a longer time period.

Or, of course, even with fully opening and delays in vaccine deliveries the level of hospitalisations in the young and healthy may be manageable. In that case there is no justification for continuing any of the restrictions.

CoronaBlocker

Faugheen wrote: »

1. Never said you said it.
2. It's a disgusting point of view of so many people who contribute to the economy.
3. I'm not defending personal insults. However I do think saying 'tough luck' to medically vulnerable people is a much worse statement to make than calling someone a poo poo head.

How do you know the poster wasn't taken aback by the statement made about medically vulnerable people? Do you know anything about that poster? Do you know their situation?

People react in different ways for different reasons. Some legitimately, some shamefully. Saying 'tough luck' to medically vulnerable people is shameful and if the worst reaction the poster gets is being called an 'ugly head' then I think he's well able to manage.

I had initially read it as to mean an ugly personality rather than looks. I think making a statement like that about medically vulnerable people is a very ugly one to make.

Big non sequitur. That comment is part of a greater debate - debate it with the OP or move on.

Personal insults however are, as I understand it, against the rules here.

titan18

namloc1980 wrote: »

Anyone getting AstraZeneca would be excluded from society for quite a while if they bring in "vaccinated only" access to services. If you got your first AZ jab today it'd be the middle of July before you'd be fully vaccinated and allowed participate in society. And for most people probably be into June before they get their first jab meaning summer is a write off.

Yup, it's a good way to have people refusing the AZ vaccine if they go on the 2 weeks after full vaccination.