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

AdamD

Carlowgirl wrote: »

Its not that straight forward when the vaccine doesn't cover new strains or we don't know yet of it does.

Using new strains as a reason to not see your vaccinated parents is mental

iamwhoiam

Carlowgirl wrote: »

Its not that straight forward when the vaccine doesn't cover new strains or we don't know yet of it does.

Aw come on, you cant live your life waiting for the worst case to happen .Go see them and if you really need to put a mask on and stay outdoors .

eddie73

Carlowgirl wrote: »

Its not that straight forward when the vaccine doesn't cover new strains or we don't know yet of it does.

Where does this end?

If you and both your parents are vaccinated, switch off the tv for the next 6 months and enjoy each other's company, doing absolutely everything that you did before the time of covid.

FintanMcluskey

AdamD wrote: »

Using new strains as a reason to not see your vaccinated parents is mental

I blame NPHET for this.

The have got behind a message that the vaccine might not be as effective against variants that don’t exist

Incredibly irresponsible of them

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/nphet-says-normal-life-some-way-off-and-vaccination-unlikely-to-fully-halt-covid-19-1.4494969%3fmode=amp

The impact of variants is also unknown. This means that the virus is likely to continue to be in circulation in future years,” the document states.

As recently as April 26th, NPHET spoke about the vaccine not working against variants that don’t exist.

They have a lot to answer for

timsey tiger

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I blame NPHET for this.

The have got behind a message that the vaccine might not be as effective against variants that don’t exist

Incredibly irresponsible of them

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/nphet-says-normal-life-some-way-off-and-vaccination-unlikely-to-fully-halt-covid-19-1.4494969%3fmode=amp



As recently as April 26th, NPHET spoke about the vaccine not working against variants that don’t exist.

They have a lot to answer for

Maybe, but people/jurnos have to take responsibility for only half listening too. If NPHET talk of possibilities and relative efficacies and somebody turns this into something else, that's not all on NPHET.

Sweet.Science

Carlowgirl wrote: »

Its not that straight forward when the vaccine doesn't cover new strains or we don't know yet of it does.

You cant leave your house ever again if that's your thought process .

Dr. Em

The perception of Covid danger seems to be linked to our own circle of experience, e.g. those who have seen lots of Covid harm understandably overestimate the danger and those who haven't underestimate it.

Unfortunately, there also seems to be an empathy gap for those suffering anxiety or even post-traumatic stress. (Talk about a mental health crisis - some health staff have seen far too much to cope with.)

On the balance of risk, it is relatively safe to visit those vaccinated, but I don't get the scorn for those who are anxious about it.

FintanMcluskey

timsey tiger wrote: »

Maybe, but people/jurnos have to take responsibility for only half listening too. If NPHET talk of possibilities and relative efficacies and somebody turns this into something else, that's not all on NPHET.

It’s in NPHET’s letter to government on April 22nd

https://www.gov.ie/en/collection/ba4aa0-letters-from-the-cmo-to-the-minister-for-health/

Bottom of page 3

There is a particular concern about introducing a new variant against which the vaccine may be less effective

So they actually put in a letter that they are worried the vaccine won’t work against a variant that doesn’t exist.

Dr. Em

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

It’s in NPHET’s letter to government on April 22nd

https://www.gov.ie/en/collection/ba4aa0-letters-from-the-cmo-to-the-minister-for-health/

Bottom of page 3



So they actually put in a letter that they are worried the vaccine won’t work against a variant that doesn’t exist.

Isn't it part of their job to warn the government about potential threats? Would you be against a property developer being warned against a flood that doesn't currently exist, e.g. one that is predicted?

prunudo

timsey tiger wrote: »

Maybe, but people/jurnos have to take responsibility for only half listening too. If NPHET talk of possibilities and relative efficacies and somebody turns this into something else, that's not all on NPHET.

The media have continuously over hyped or misrepresented what nphet or government ministers have said over the last year. Nphet are in a tricky situation, they can't be seen to be hiding information but on the flip side they probably have been guilty of being too honest on occasion.
Even as recently as this week, when the cmo referenced Donegal and the fact they could go back into lockdown if they didn't pull up their socks, one news report I heard used his soundbite but editted out Donegal so it sounded like he was chastising the whole country.

Jim_Hodge

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

It’s in NPHET’s letter to government on April 22nd

https://www.gov.ie/en/collection/ba4aa0-letters-from-the-cmo-to-the-minister-for-health/

Bottom of page 3



So they actually put in a letter that they are worried the vaccine won’t work against a variant that doesn’t exist.

You've just done what some journalists have done: taken a portion of a sentence that suits the narrative. The same paragraph points out how easing of restrictions on visiting is possible.

Dr. Em

Dr. Em wrote: »

On the balance of risk, it is relatively safe to visit those vaccinated, but I don't get the scorn for those who are anxious about it.

I get it entirely. We finally have a way out of this dreary mess, reflected in falling hospitalisations/ICU admissions despite a relatively high plateau of daily cases. The vaccines are proving their weight in gold. To be fretful about visiting those who have received both jabs almost beggars belief. Why enter a supermarket if one is that paranoid, or even tiptoe outside the front door altogether. Vaccines have kept pace with the annual flu, and it will be no different with Covid. It's time to embrace the real world and accept that everything carries a modicum of risk, however tiny. Even NPHET have come to realise this. It's a miserable existence anticipating the worst case scenario, live and let live I say and to hell with the begrudgers.

Dr. Em

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I get it entirely. We finally have a way out of this dreary mess, reflected in falling hospitalisations/ICU admissions despite a relatively high plateau of daily cases. The vaccines are proving their weight in gold. To be fretful about visiting those who have received both jabs almost beggars belief. Why enter a supermarket if one is that paranoid, or even tiptoe outside the front door altogether. Vaccines have kept pace with the annual flu, and it will be no different with Covid. It's time to embrace the real world and accept that everything carries a modicum of risk, however tiny. Even NPHET have come to realise this. It's a miserable existence anticipating the worst case scenario, live and let live I say and to hell with the begrudgers.

Wtf? Would you say that to someone who is not opposing the reopening but is personally anxious all the same? That they are a begrudger? Really?

Eod100

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I get it entirely. We finally have a way out of this dreary mess, reflected in falling hospitalisations/ICU admissions despite a relatively high plateau of daily cases. The vaccines are proving their weight in gold. To be fretful about visiting those who have received both jabs almost beggars belief. Why enter a supermarket if one is that paranoid, or even tiptoe outside the front door altogether. Vaccines have kept pace with the annual flu, and it will be no different with Covid. It's time to embrace the real world and accept that everything carries a modicum of risk, however tiny. Even NPHET have come to realise this. It's a miserable existence anticipating the worst case scenario, live and let live I say and to hell with the begrudgers.

You say you get it but your comment demonstrates you clearly haven't got the point you're replying to. It's not about begrudgery or jealousy or scare mongering or curtain twitching or any other terms bandied about here frequently. Reality is after living with covid for so long naturally some people will be anxious about easing of restrictions even if safe. Some people will have no issue whatsoever but to not get that other people have a different perspective isn't getting it at all tbh.

FintanMcluskey

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

You've just done what some journalists have done: taken a portion of a sentence that suits the narrative. The same paragraph points out how easing of restrictions on visiting is possible.

No I’ve quoted what they wrote in a letter while making the point that the messaging from NPHET is incorrect and causes unnecessary worry like the initial poster not visiting vaccinated parents

Your telling me they didn’t mean what they said, which I don’t understand

Public health advice is incredibly sensitive as it can cause unnecessary worry when talking about variants that don’t exist which the vaccine may not work on

Jim_Hodge

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

No I’ve quoted what they wrote in a letter while making the point that the messaging from NPHET is incorrect and causes unnecessary worry like the initial poster not visiting vaccinated parents

Your telling me they didn’t mean what they said, which I don’t understand

Public health advice is incredibly sensitive as it can cause unnecessary worry when talking about variants that don’t exist which the vaccine may not work on

That's not what I was telling you at all. And you know it.

You took a portion of a sentence while ignoring the rest of the paragraph, so as to make your point - just what some media are doing.

Good luck, you've your mind set so I'll leave you to it.

hmmm

It's interesting watching some of the US commentators, particularly on the news shows yesterday. They are effectively winding down, people who want a vaccine can generally get one, and the push is on to convince others. They're expecting a sharp drop in hospitalisations over the next few weeks, and the pandemic to be effectively over for them (with a need to be careful over the next few months).

It's like a football game I think. We went 2-0 down very quickly, got back a goal around halftime with treatments (2-1) and then knocked in two quick goals as the vaccines came along in a rush (2-3). With the news that the vaccines are suppressing transmission and blocking variants we've added another to go two up (2-4), and have 5 minutes left in the match.

FintanMcluskey

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

That's not what I was telling you at all. And you know it.

You took a portion of a sentence while ignoring the rest of the paragraph, so as to make your point - just what some media are doing.

Good luck, you've your mind set so I'll leave you to it.

Did NPHET, in writing, mention concern about variants that the vaccine might not be as effective on?

How does the rest of the paragraph before that sentence in some way negate the implication of the it?

Dr. Em

hmmm wrote: »

It's interesting watching some of the US commentators, particularly on the news shows yesterday. They are effectively winding down, people who want a vaccine can generally get one, and the push is on to convince others. They're expecting a sharp drop in hospitalisations over the next few weeks, and the pandemic to be effectively over for them (with a need to be careful over the next few months).

It's like a football game I think. We went 2-0 down very quickly, got back a goal around halftime with treatments (2-1) and then knocked in two quick goals as the vaccines came along in a rush (2-3). With the news that the vaccines are suppressing transmission and blocking variants we've added another to go two up (2-4), and have 5 minutes left in the match.

I heard a bit of similar coverage. They could be making a mistake to attribute the slowdown so much to vaccine hesitancy. I knew some older people in the US who wanted a vaccine and were struggling to get one until just recently. In their area, they needed to book an appointment online and have a mobile to receive a confirmation. Obviously this creates problems for many people. They also had to be able to drive to the pharmacy. If you compare the vaccination rates for over 65s in the US and the UK, the US has missed a lot of people.

hmmm

Dr. Em wrote: »

I heard a bit of similar coverage. They could be making a mistake to attribute the slowdown so much to vaccine hesitancy. I knew some older people in the US who wanted a vaccine and were struggling to get one until just recently. In their area, they needed to book an appointment online and have a mobile to receive a confirmation. Obviously this creates problems for many people. They also had to be able to drive to the pharmacy. If you compare the vaccination rates for over 65s in the US and the UK, the US has missed a lot of people.

I'm assuming also they are a bit like Israel, where you had a large section of society who ignored public health advice and many of these groups have already been exposed to Covid. Combine that group with the vaccinated numbers and you are close to herd immunity. That's not the case here where most people have generally observed precautions, and so vaccines will need to do more of our heavy lifting.

timsey tiger

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

"There is a particular concern about introducing a new variant against which the vaccine may be less effective"


So they actually put in a letter that they are worried the vaccine won’t work against a variant that doesn’t exist.

Yes that is their job. It's called contingency planning.

Dr. Em

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's the level of ignorance we're dealing with. Affecting concern for others who are consumed by irrational fears of reopening society, and not one solitary damn given for the half million unemployed (courtesy of lockdown) desperate to return to work and normality. Sigh.

That is a lot of assumptions. It is perfectly possible to have lost one's job, suffer poor mental health, support the reopening, be desperately worried about local businesses, to personally know someone who has been very ill with Covid or even died, to know someone whose vital health screening has been cancelled, and to be very anxious about meeting other people socially. No one wanted to have to lockdown. We are all angry about the virus and mismanagement thereof. Heaping scorn on someone who is anxious is tantamount to bullying.

FintanMcluskey

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Did NPHET, in writing, mention concern about variants that the vaccine might not be as effective on?

How does the rest of the paragraph before that sentence in some way negate the implication of the it?

This is a consistent tactic. Choose a single statement from within a full document and use that statement in isolation and out of context to represent and try to denigrate the view of those they are arguing against, all the while ignoring everything else written and the context in which the statement was made.

Is the ultimate in bad faith debate, a tactic usually seen on Tucker Carlson and Hannity.

Lumen

hmmm wrote: »

I'm assuming also they are a bit like Israel, where you had a large section of society who ignored public health advice and many of these groups have already been exposed to Covid. Combine that group with the vaccinated numbers and you are close to herd immunity. That's not the case here where most people have generally observed precautions, and so vaccines will need to do more of our heavy lifting.

The difference in cumulative cases between Israel and Ireland only amounts to about 5% of the population, which is a little over once week's worth of first doses at current vaccination rates.

Faugheen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is a consistent tactic. Choose a single statement from within a full document and use that statement in isolation and out of context to represent and try to denigrate the view of those they are arguing against, all the while ignoring everything else written and the context in which the statement was made.

Is the ultimate in bad faith debate, a tactic usually seen on Tucker Carlson and Hannity.

Exactly this.

Asking questions nobody knows the answer to when trying to pick holes in one line of a statement out of context is the ultimate in bad faith.

Derek Zoolander

hmmm wrote: »

I'm assuming also they are a bit like Israel, where you had a large section of society who ignored public health advice and many of these groups have already been exposed to Covid. Combine that group with the vaccinated numbers and you are close to herd immunity. That's not the case here where most people have generally observed precautions, and so vaccines will need to do more of our heavy lifting.

What the data has shown is that cases drop significantly once vaccination rate hits 50% of total population - this is true for U.K. and Israel and of US which hasn’t hit this threshold yet

Eod100

Zebra3 wrote: »

People who cried out for lockdown who didn't give a toss about who they put out of work (as long they kept their own job) or the loss of civil liberties are now looking for empathy?

:rolleyes:

It's quite possible to have empathy for more than one person or group at a time and to have empathy for people who you don't agree with (making the assumption that everyone who may be anxious was always in favour of restrictions which is a big one). My point was regardless of views of restrictions people have been living with them so long that some may have almost become conditioned by them. Some will be ready to go back to more normality. Others might take a bit longer. Think it's fairly juvenile and lacking in emotional intelligence to dismiss those that can't snap back as begrudgers imo.

Eod100

Eod100 wrote: »

It's quite possible to have empathy for more than one person or group at a time and to have empathy for people who you don't agree with (making the assumption that everyone who may be anxious was always in favour of restrictions which is a big one). My point was regardless of views of restrictions people have been living with them so long that some may have almost become conditioned by them. Some will be ready to go back to more normality. Others might take a bit longer. Think it's fairly juvenile and lacking in emotional intelligence to dismiss those that can't snap back as begrudgers imo.

The begrudgers remark was a generalised rallying cry to embrace life to the fullest without apprehension of what others think. You ingeniously decided it was directed at that poster, for the sake of taking the high moral ground and pontificate about perceived wrongs. You take myopia and bad faith posting to a whole new level, not exactly a model of integrity or credibility for that matter.

Eod100

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The begrudgers remark was a generalised rallying cry to embrace life to the fullest without apprehension of what others think. You ingeniously decided it was directed at that poster, for the sake of taking the high moral ground and pontificate about perceived wrongs. You take myopia and bad faith posting to a whole new level, not exactly a model of integrity or credibility for that matter.

I read it in the context of your full post and your reply to OP about busybodies gawping over hedges. Not taking any moral high ground. Just willing and able to accept that everyone is different. If I have misinterpreted your post then mea cuala but can't say it was very clear and if adding all the above context after the fact may demonstrate that. Anyways will leave it there. Enjoy the rest of your bank holiday Bertie.

FintanMcluskey

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a consistent tactic. Choose a single statement from within a full document and use that statement in isolation and out of context to represent and try to denigrate the view of those they are arguing against, all the while ignoring everything else written and the context in which the statement was made.

Is the ultimate in bad faith debate, a tactic usually seen on Tucker Carlson and Hannity.

That’s serious waffle

I was highlighting something NPHET put on paper (it’s in black and white) while discussing a poster who was not visiting their vaccinated parents.

There is no misinterpretation, it’s in the letter to government

I struggle with the logic behind your argument that NPHET aren’t actually saying what they actually said, or in this case print

Although, you also follow the logic that last weekend inter county travel wasn’t safe until July but since Tuesday it’s safe from next week