Vaccine Megathread - See OP for threadbans

Strazdas

A Shaved Duck? wrote: »

Vincent brown called him out for the self serving charlatan he is when he jumped from the independent to try and get a ministerial position.

Since then donnelly has proved every statement brown made on it completely true.

He does seem a bit of a loose cannon and overly fond of media interviews.

Strazdas

expectationlost wrote: »

there is no plan but it has been considered

That could well be the case but he should have kept it to himself - the Irish Times immediately seized on that part of his interview and made it a headline.

km79

expectationlost wrote: »

there is no plan but it has been considered

HSE chief executive Paul Reid says its plan will only change if directed to do so.

"We are working off medical, scientific advice from the National Immunisation Advice Committee which is very strong and compelling to administer the vaccines based on age," said Mr Reid.

"That is where the highest risk is and that is the plan agreed by Government and that is the plan we are working through right now.

"If at any stage there are changed by the Government, we will change the plan accordingly but all of the medical and scientific advice is strongly to administer based on age."


It’s not being considered as there is no medical or scientific evidence to make them consider a change in approach they took only a few weeks ago based on strong evidence

Hurrache

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently a Government spokesman has just denied the story and says there is no plan to change the age cohorts (RTE).

Because there is no story to deny, it was Donnelly on a solo kite flying expedition again.

stephenjmcd

km79 wrote: »

HSE chief executive Paul Reid says its plan will only change if directed to do so.

"We are working off medical, scientific advice from the National Immunisation Advice Committee which is very strong and compelling to administer the vaccines based on age," said Mr Reid.

"That is where the highest risk is and that is the plan agreed by Government and that is the plan we are working through right now.

"If at any stage there are changed by the Government, we will change the plan accordingly but all of the medical and scientific advice is strongly to administer based on age."


It’s not being considered as there is no medical or scientific evidence to make them consider a change in approach they took only a few weeks ago based on strong evidence

Paul Reid wouldn't know if it's being considered or not. They get dictated to by the government and NIAC


Your saying its not being considered. NIAC could well be looking into but the only plan Paul Reid has is the one infront of him.

expectationlost

Strazdas wrote: »

That could well be the case but he should have kept it to himself - the Irish Times immediately seized on that part of his interview and made it a headline.

read the doc https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116918051&postcount=1911

expectationlost

km79 wrote: »

HSE chief executive Paul Reid says its plan will only change if directed to do so.

"We are working off medical, scientific advice from the National Immunisation Advice Committee which is very strong and compelling to administer the vaccines based on age," said Mr Reid.

"That is where the highest risk is and that is the plan agreed by Government and that is the plan we are working through right now.

"If at any stage there are changed by the Government, we will change the plan accordingly but all of the medical and scientific advice is strongly to administer based on age."


It’s not being considered as there is no medical or scientific evidence to make them consider a change in approach they took only a few weeks ago based on strong evidence

read the doc https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116918051&postcount=1911

Corholio

expectationlost wrote: »

read the doc https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116918051&postcount=1911

We know it was part of a plan once upon a time but the confusion is the fact he mentioned it seemingly without other ministers knowing it was being considered again. The kite is nearly in space at this stage.

Skygord

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Hes gone about it the wrong way but the logic behind it is pretty solid to be fair to him. I'm no fan of his but there's scope for it to be looked at. Ultimately NIAC can say no so can the vaccine task force but I can absolutely see why it would be looked into.

The logic behind it isn't idiotic, the manner of which he's gone about it is

Not idiotic, but it's an approach that targets chains of transmission. As did the plan which prioritised occupations like teachers, Gards, meat factory workers etc - and that would be a better way to target chains of transmission.

But we pivoted away from that, only a couple of weeks ago, to protect those to whom the virus is likely to do the most damage - by age.

Pivoting back again, after only just getting the message across about age, will just reopen those debates about Gards, Teachers etc, for probably marginal benefit, yet massive distrust of our 'leaders' having an efficient plan.

Donnelly must go.

expectationlost

Corholio wrote: »

We know it was part of a plan once upon a time but the confusion is the fact he mentioned it seemingly without other ministers knowing it was being considered again. The kite is nearly in space at this stage.

They say his comments to @IrishTimes was the first they heard of the idea.

ministers should read the doc they agree to and publish

Beasty

Threads merged

Corholio

Skygord wrote: »

Not idiotic, but it's an approach that targets chains of transmission. As did the plan which prioritised occupations like teachers, Gards, meat factory workers etc - and that would be a better way to target chains of transmission.

But we pivoted away from that, only a couple of weeks ago, to protect those to whom the virus is likely to do the most damage - by age.

Pivoting back again, after only just getting the message across about age, will just reopen those debates about Gards, Teachers etc, for probably marginal benefit, yet massive distrust of our 'leaders' having an efficient plan.

Donnelly must go.

Yes, the fact they made a big deal about the age benefit to the rollout, pivoting away from that so soon after again would be terrible optics. I don't actually think it's an awful idea, there's a few things they could do indeed, but these guys put themselves into corners so much that it's hard to know whether even good ideas would work under this lot.

Corholio

expectationlost wrote: »

ministers should read the doc they agree to and publish

First they had heard of the idea being introduced now obviously.

expectationlost

Corholio wrote: »

First they had heard of the idea being introduced now obviously.

they agree to and published a document that suggested this as a possibility https://assets.gov.ie/108854/babc7d1b-cb10-49db-8dd0-0c7408dea162.pdf

Corholio

expectationlost wrote: »

they agree to and published a document that suggested this as a possibility https://assets.gov.ie/108854/babc7d1b-cb10-49db-8dd0-0c7408dea162.pdf

You're not understanding. This hasn't been mentioned since that was published, we have a rollout plan where that wasn't the order, the confusion was it being considered to change to that now without some knowing.

lulublue22

sd1999 wrote: »

Also, given that non vulnerable under 60s won’t get a vaccine until June, the argument about vaccinating secondary school teachers is redundant as secondary schools are closed from June onwards. Primary school teachers tend to be younger and if they were prioritised would only have had one dose a few weeks before the primary school year ends.

This primary school staff tend to be younger is a fallacy - only 13% of school staff fall into the younger cohort. The vast majority of school staff are in the 30 to 50 age group followed by the 50 to 60 age group. Plus July provision and DEIS camps run through out July while home based provision runs from July to August.

Not arguing for or against school staff being vacc but school staff tend to be younger is simply not true.

expectationlost

Corholio wrote: »

You're not understanding. This hasn't been mentioned since that was published, we have a rollout plan where that wasn't the order, the confusion was it being considered to change to that now without some knowing.

no they are claiming this is the first they've heard of the idea when it isn't.

Corholio

expectationlost wrote: »

no they are claiming this is the first they've heard of the idea when it isn't.

Sigh. Can't help you anymore.

expectationlost

Corholio wrote: »

Sigh. Can't help you anymore.

They say his comments to @IrishTimes was the first they heard of the idea. https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1383382755245924355

Corholio

expectationlost wrote: »

They say his comments to @IrishTimes was the first they heard of the idea. https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1383382755245924355

One last time. The 'idea' you are quoting is not what the article is talking about. It's not the original idea of younger being vaccinated, it's the idea that the rollout could now be changed to it. The line before states they are perplexed at it being head of schedule.

Boggerman12

So Donnelly proves his ego outdoes his abilities and his lack of popularity by having a brain fart of an idea.must be really getting to him that his constituency colleague Harris is more popular than him.
Donnelly out of his depth and should be fired.

castletownman

In fairness to Donnelly, his logic probably was that more people in the 18-30 age group are likely to use trampolines at gatherings, and we all know how potentially dangerous he finds them.

Lumen

expectationlost wrote: »

They say his comments to @IrishTimes was the first they heard of the idea.

People need to stop using the term "they" to apply in a handwaving sense to anyone and everyone in a position of responsibility.

The document linked above was published by the Department of Health.

The quote about not having seen it before was from "senior government figures".

It is perfectly possible that "senior government figures" hadn't read the document. Whose fault is that? Dunno. Does it matter? Dunno.

Vicxas

expectationlost wrote: »

They say his comments to @IrishTimes was the first they heard of the idea. https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1383382755245924355

Makes sense in some ways, seeing as 18-34 year olds seem to be the driving force of infections.

expectationlost

Lumen wrote: »

People need to stop using the term "they" to apply in a handwaving sense to anyone and everyone in a position of responsibility.

The document linked above was published by the Department of Health.

The quote about not having seen it before was from "senior government figures".

its the national strategy its a cabinet approved document.

Lumen

expectationlost wrote: »

its the national strategy its a cabinet approved document.

So then the "senior government figures" hadn't read the document that they'd approved? And that's Donnelly's fault?

I just want to be sure that we're flinging poo at the right targets.

Maxface

I'm a firefighter in my thirties. We obviously have been working as normal throughout and attend medical calls in addition to normal calls. We haven't been vaccinated yet and are part of the normal cohorts. I'd be annoyed if younger people got the vaccine ahead just because of age.

hmmm

Lumen wrote: »

So then the "senior government figures" hadn't read the document that they'd approved? And that's Donnelly's fault?

I just want to be sure that we're flinging poo at the right targets.

If a group of randomners on an Internet forum could see straight away that this would cause serious political controversy, a Minister should not have gone on a solo run with this without informing and getting the backing of their cabinet colleagues. No matter what a document from a few months ago said.

Now this kite has been well and truly shot out of the sky, and even if it was a good idea it will be far more difficult to get public support because the groundwork wasn't done to prepare.

Donnelly is some spanner.

This will come to nothing, but he really is a very akward politician. A tendency to say the wrong thing. Of all ministers I wish he was gone and never heard of again. He's a wrong one as they say in my part of the world.

Covid is a risk as is trampolines.

He makes my skin crawl tbh.

stephenjmcd

hmmm wrote: »

If a group of randomners on an Internet forum could see straight away that this would cause serious political controversy, a Minister should not have gone on a solo run with this without informing and getting the backing of their cabinet colleagues. No matter what a document from a few months ago said.

Now this kite has been well and truly shot out of the sky, and even if it was a good idea it will be far more difficult to get public support because the groundwork wasn't done to prepare.

A minister doesn't need to get the backing of his cabinet colleagues to ask his own department to report on something to him. He'd then take that report to cabinet where it could be consider and could very well be dismissed.

As much as he's gone about it the wrong way by saying it in an interview with the Times he's not actually done anything wrong in terms or informing the cabinet.

Now I'm not defending him here because its gone public in a messy manner and an unneeded manner but the rational behind his request to the department to at least look into it has fairly sound basis.