Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119553386#Comment_119553386

The NIH website actively recommends against the use of Ivermectin:

The Panel’s recommendation is primarily informed by recently published randomized controlled trials.17-20 The primary outcomes of these trials showed that the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 had no clinical benefit.

or this reason, and because several medications now have demonstrated clinical benefit for the treatment of COVID-19, the Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial.

To suggest that shows that conspiracy theorists were right all along is complete nonsense.

Ibuprofen is totally separate issue, and nothing you have linked in any way supports that claim either re: proving them right.

JP Liz V1

267 in hospital 9 ICU

I think the vulnerable will be offered another booster with the flu jab around late October early November

Apothic_Red

While I get the anti-vax sentiment has grown in popularity I do believe much of it is blinkered to the fact that 95%+ of our population is already double jabbed with the most effacious vaccines available & many of that cohort are also single if not double boosted.

The FT stats guy, John Burn Murdoch, broke it down wonderfully in a Twitter post. Why was Hong Kong so effected by Omnicron ? Why is China still going into Lockdown. All your answers lie here.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1503420660869214213

Our success in beating Covid 19 is simply down to mRNA vaccines.

It's human nature to feel bravado for conquering a once in a lifetime pandemic, it's even forgiveable to look back on restrictions & experimental vaccines with distain, I get it.

What you cannot do is dismiss the effectiveness of these vaccines, yes you may question side effects & how they were granted approval but you cannot question if they worked.

Spudman_20000

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558578#Comment_119558578

That Twitter post is from March. Have a look at New Zealand more recently and tell me is it still such a success story.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/new-zealand-covid-19-death-rate-record-levels-2022-07-22/

Also bear in mind much of New Zealand looks like this:

whereas Hong Kong looks like this:

DLink

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558578#Comment_119558578

If it is indeed the case that vaccines do work, why then have countries with low vaccination rates not melted down due to covid and disappeared off the face of the earth?

Poland: 59.4%

India: 68.3%

Mexico: 62.0%

Turkey: 63.0%

Romania: 42.1%

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_WRL

Vaccines went from preventing transmission and killing covid dead in its tracks to only making you less sick if you do get covid.

That's not a vaccine though, is it? By definition a vaccine is supposed to provide immunity:

Vaccine:

a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.

The covid "vaccine", at best, is a complimentary treatment for covid, but not a vaccine, yet we were forced to take it in order to resume a somewhat normal life.

Yes, we could refuse it, but I (like many others) needed to get the fück away from this prison island last year so I took it. I'll say a good proportion of the Irish population only took the vaccine because they wanted to have a pint, the rest took it because Mehole & King Tony browbeat them into it.

If pubs & travel hadn't been restricted, I bet the vaccine uptake would have been much lower, as it stands the booster uptake is much lower than the original two dose uptake (I think 65%), but unfortunately we'll never know what would have happened to the Irish vaccine uptake rate if the country hadn't been locked down.

I know I certainly wouldn't have taken the "vaccine" if I could have travelled without a barcode.

You put too much faith in the science around covid, science is not averse to pushing agendas, same as governments & the media do.

jimmybobbyschweiz

Any sort of COVID restriction will require the State to pony up cash in order to implement, whether it be social distancing (supports for businesses like pubs and music venues that cannot operate properly with social distancing) or whatever, which indicates that there is little to no chance of much coming in as the State does not have the cash to implement any broad stroke measure. At best I'd say public transport and health environments might see some restrictions but that's about it. It's all still Omicron anyway and a new variant, if there will be one worth mentioning, would probably not grip until after the winter anyway at this stage.

72sheep

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558578#Comment_119558578

Nine tweets into his thread John, with patronising contempt, tells us: "But that would be to miss the fact that, all else being equal, older people are at far *far* higher risk of death from Covid than younger". I'm out ;-)

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119559353#Comment_119559353

Melted off the face of earth? What is this strawman nonsense?

Of course it is a vaccine. It primes the immune system by innoculation so the immune system is better able to respond to the virus if encountered. Tick. It stimulates the production of antibodies and provides immunity while those antibodies are present. Tick. It acts as an anitgen without inducing the disease. Tick.

More than that, this immune response also extends to the longer lasting immune system memory cells. Which is where the durable protection against severe covid comes from.

This is a study showing 15,000 fewer cases in vaccinated v unvaccinated in Sweden against the 2021 variants. How could it do this if it does induce immunity and stimulate antibodies?

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)00089-7/fulltext

Sure sign give away of what kind of anti vax propaganda we can expect from someone who puts vaccine in quotes.

DLink

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119565597#Comment_119565597

Yawn... straw what now?

While you were busy rebutting my definition of a vaccine, you conveniently dodged around my point regarding lower vaccine uptake rates outside of good old obedient, catholic Ireland.

If the high vaccine uptake rate has indeed saved us from dying a roaring death, or more to the point, a wheezing death, here in Ireland, why have countries with lower vaccine uptake rates not suffered catastrophic covid deaths and social upheaval as a result?

Are they built of stronger stuff than us Irish?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119565829#Comment_119565829

I didn't dodge it. I called a strawman a strawman. How was covid going to "melt down a country"? What does that even mean? That's a strawman argument.

Is 60% a 'low' vaccination rate?

I expect if you look at the demographics of those countries listed are they comparable to Ireland and other Western European countries in terms of number of people in the most vulnerable groups and conditions and life expectancy?

And some of those were very hard hit without vaccines in earlier waves, further impacting that above comparison.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-60981318

DLink

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119565882#Comment_119565882

You keep fighting the good covid fight. Good for you.

Pablo Escobar

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558615#Comment_119558615

This is very simple. New Zealand was an anomaly. They had no Covid so records are fairly easy when your base is zero. They had something like 25 official deaths coming into the year.

And on the vaccine point, they’ve administered between 11 and 12 million doses (in a country of 5 million) and still 20-25% of people in ICU have had no doses and 50% aren’t fully vaccinated. I can’t help you understand the math as that seems to be a huge issue these days, but that essentially is proof.

Johnboy1951

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558578#Comment_119558578

What you cannot do is dismiss the effectiveness of these vaccines, yes you may question side effects & how they were granted approval but you cannot question if they worked.

I don't have to.

The scientists have told us so.

These treatments

do not prevent infection

do not prevent development of Covid, hospitalisation or death as a result

do not prevent spreading the virus

What then do you think they are effective at?

It would appear you have a very different definition of an 'effective vaccine' than I.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558615#Comment_119558615

New Xi-land

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119533207#Comment_119533207

Just like Pfizer "100% effective against transmission" and Moderna.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119546640#Comment_119546640

These are deaths "with COVID" not "from COVID". Big difference. A recent antibody study which detected nucleocapsid antibodies against the COVID virus as opposed to spike protein antibodies from the vaccine in Cork detected them in 95% of samples taken despite less than half of the participants actually knowing they previously had COVID. With that in mind, further restrictions are absolutely pointless.

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/health/most-staff-and-students-at-university-caught-covid-recently-but-they-did-not-know-it-study-finds-41935441.html

As an aside, they say here the nucleocapsid test could be useful during an outbreak - how? It detects antibodies from up to 6 months previous.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119568652#Comment_119568652

They do prevent all of these things.

Comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated, there will be more cases in the unvaccinated and significantly higher risk of severe covid.

How about you tell us what your definition of 'prevent' and 'effective' are.

In Sweden, 15000 fewer cases in vaccinated versus unvaccinated over the course of study period in 2021.

In terms of severe covid, for those vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine... the vaccine was from 90% to 64% effective at prevention versus unvaccinated over the duration of the study.

That translates into prevented infections, prevented transmissions, prevented hospitalisations and prevented deaths.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)00089-7/fulltext

darconio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119554545#Comment_119554545

Since you like the lancet:

Home as the new frontier for the treatment of COVID-19: the case for anti-inflammatory agents - The Lancet Infectious Diseases

And again, quite a change of tune from the recommendation to avoid it at all costs , imagine how many death and hospitalization could have been avoided if only WHO didn't decide to play against humanity with their foolish guidelines. Why the responsible are not prosecuted?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119571211#Comment_119571211

So you've dropped your misrepresentations about Ivermectin then?

Are you aware of the side effects of NSAIDs?

Are you aware ibuprofen was examined in the early stages of the pandemic as a treatment?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-ibuprofen-idUSKBN23A1DV

Are you aware of the trials and studies and use of dexamethasone as a covid treatment?

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/03/covid-treatment-developed-in-the-nhs-saves-a-million-lives/

Do you actually have a point or are you just deploying 20-20 hindsight?

darconio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119571273#Comment_119571273

And are you aware of the side effects of the vaccine? probably not since it's still in trial, and constantly changing the formula....

The links you posted from Nhs, related to dexamethasone, refer to a drug (a steroid btw what has that anything to do with NSAIDs ?) as a treatment for patients already on a ventilator.

Previously used for a wide range of ailments, including allergies and skin conditions, the drug is now being used around the globe to improve survival in patients with COVID who need oxygen or ventilation.

The other link is like 100 others reported during the previous 2 years, of alternative inexpensive treatments, that were trialed (beside being already widely used) but rather that attempting the move to the next phase, were dismissed as snake oil

Here an example, Cheap existing antidepressant likely weapon against Covid-19 – The Irish Times

Only one drug was accepted as the new frontier, and quickly deployed as the best treatment to prevent the infection. We all know how it ended

The point is that the medicine stopped being as such, and instead it was decided to follow an absurd protocol, at the expenses of many unnecessary death

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119571368#Comment_119571368

Are you?

This is just anti vax propaganda, full of resorts to strawman and vague innuendo. We've seen all these tactics before and they all amount to the same nonsense.

Look at the deliberate misrepresentation you resorted to about Ivermectin. You linked to a site claiming it somehow showed Ivermectin had merit as a covid treatment when the website expressly said:

The Panel’s recommendation is primarily informed by recently published randomized controlled trials.17-20 The primary outcomes of these trials showed that the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 had no clinical benefit... For this reason, and because several medications now have demonstrated clinical benefit for the treatment of COVID-19, the Panel recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial.

And more misrepresentation about vaccines. How are the formulas constantly changing? What does that even mean? Constant changes sounds a lot. Is it every month? So perhaps you can answer how many of these constant changes has Pfizer or Moderna undergone?

Your claims have zero credibility.

And more of the same here "medicine stopped being as such."

I've no idea what that means, I doubt you do either, cleverly sounding words strung together into incoherence.

I linked to the ibuprofen studies and actual use of dexamethasone to show that generic existing drugs were investigated and are in use for covid. It wasn't just about waiting for vaccines.

The UK also looked into steroid inhalers as home treatments to prevent hospitalisations:

https://oxfordbrc.nihr.ac.uk/brc-event/can-asthma-inhalers-prevent-covid-19-hospitalisations-the-stoic-study/

You're proven yourself incapable of refuting the evidence provided in support of vaccines.

darconio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119571411#Comment_119571411

Well I see is futile to keep reasoning with you, as usual any opinion different from the one spouted by the mainstream, is addressed as anti vax propaganda. I replied to your ivermectin quote but of course the message was deleted by the "fact-checkers", I am not going back to that, but the fact that it was removed it's just the proof that was an inconvenient truth. I was discussing the use of anti-inflammatory and the proof that if it was used as a first weapon of defense it would have decreased hospitalization by a great deal, the same anti-inflammatory that nobody recommended to use as a home treatment in the previous 2.5 years. No worries man keep up the good work, keep relying on whoever is in charge to give you the best option (according to them) for your survival/wellbeing, we all know that historically that's exactly the opposite of what's going to happen.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119571662#Comment_119571662

Nobody recommended?

I can disprove this with a few seconds of googling.

This advice is dated April 2020.

Following recommendations made by experts at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Alder Hey are recommending that parents can treat symptoms of fever or pain related to COVID-19 with either paracetamol or ibuprofen.

https://covid19.alderhey.nhs.uk/rcpch-publishes-new-advice-on-use-of-ibuprofen-and-covid-19/

This is from December 2021:

There was some concern early on in the coronavirus outbreak that ibuprofen and drugs like it might worsen outcomes for coronavirus patients, but so far we haven’t seen anything to support that. I recommend ibuprofen when fevers are high or people are feeling really miserable. However, you should still be careful: take ibuprofen with food and if you have any underlying kidney disease or ulcer disease, you may not want to reach for ibuprofen.

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/which-otc-medications-are-best-for-coronavirus-symptoms

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119573672#Comment_119573672

The vaccines:

prevent viral infection

prevent development of Covid, hospitalisation or death as a result

prevent spreading the virus.

Those are factually proven. The % effectiveness varies for each with high protection against severe disease and death.

Do they stop those things 100%?

No, no medicine or vaccine does.

They were never expected to work 100%.

Their impact has been huge in allowing the world to move on from a pandemic, irregardless of a few cranks who think otherwise because they can't or refuse to see the big picture.

The Omicron/Original vaccine should increase the % effectiveness as well and will start rolling out this winter, further reducing the impact the virus has on society.

These are all facts that have been proven true in mountains of studies across the world. To deny them is to build your own alternate reality to live in.

Spudman_20000

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119574611#Comment_119574611

What's your confidence in the updated vaccine based on? The 8 mice it was tested on?

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119574828#Comment_119574828

The same confidence that leads to the mass rollout of the yearly flu vaccines (well, it's actually much more than that as there is numerous trial results to fall back on, but as said, lots of choosing your own adventure and ignoring mainstream science is going on here now).

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119574758#Comment_119574758

??

If you actually want to discuss, who is "they" how are they manipulating your reality for you?

But they still try to manipulate your reality.

PTH2009

I see a drama about the UKs government response is airing in a few weeks

https://youtu.be/tl8PolKlg5U

Apothic_Red

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119568652#Comment_119568652

I see that you enjoy being obtuse, does dramatically reducing serious illness & death not form part of your equation.

I wont waste your time if you don't waste mine

Johnboy1951

Those posters attempting to redefine the meaning of 'prevent' are fooling nobody, except maybe themselves.

If you wish to imply the shots help reduce the incidences of infection then say so, but be well aware that is not the same as preventing infection.

For those who wish to dispute the meaning of 'prevent' take it up with those who determine those things.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119584392#Comment_119584392

How can you reduce the incidences of infection without preventing infections? We'll leave you to your semantic rabbit hole.

The meaning of my statements are clear:

In terms of severe covid, for those vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine... the vaccine was from 90% to 64% effective at prevention versus unvaccinated over the duration of the study.

That translates into prevented infections, prevented transmissions, prevented hospitalisations and prevented deaths.

I'm not trying to fool anyone, I've posted real world data showing the benefits of the vaccine which trump any semantic games or clutching at the exact meaning of a word in a dictionary.