Most Comical/Hysterical COVID News Stories of the past few years

ceadaoin.

I don't need to prove my claims that the vaccines don't stop infection or transmission, don't stop symptoms (as stated earlier) and that effectiveness wanes to zero after several months. Those are widely accepted facts. To claim otherwise is misinformation

It's also misinformation to state that no one ever said the vaccines would stop infection or were 100% effective when they did say those things.

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057424#Comment_121057424

It was actually politicians though that were claiming the vaccines would be the end of the pandemic, our own government made this claim.

A lot of scientists at the time were saying it would not stop the pandemic but would just be another tool in the fight against covid. A lot of scientists were acknowledging there were unknowns with regard to variants also.

So, depends who you were listening to.

Sconsey

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057334#Comment_121057334

Where is the lie in that statement? the information he links to spells it out exactly what he says. I predict a response from you that jumps to some other random conspiracy-theory nonsense. Go on, answer the question, what lie did he just tell?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057424#Comment_121057424

They are not. You do need to provide evidence and you know you have none.

Even within your own post you contradict yourself. If the effectiveness wanes that means it had effectiveness at all the things you listed.

So which is it?

You cant keep your story straight.

You continually shift the goalposts of your claims, shifting their meaning or shifting back and forth in time.

I provided documented evidence disproving your anti vax propaganda.

This is an entirely bad faith argument and you know it. Your posts represent an utterly dishonest attempt at deception.

normanoffside

Just to bring this back on topic...

https://twitter.com/bray_ie/status/1390735791748485120

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057460#Comment_121057460

Do you know that the mRNA vaccine technology have paved the way for treatments for illnesses and cancers that may soon be treatable, with a little adapted jab , melanoma for example ?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/apr/07/cancer-and-heart-disease-vaccines-ready-by-end-of-the-decade

You gotta love this , ceadaoin !

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057955#Comment_121057955

That should be mandatory. Nothing to do with covid. Anyone encroaching any closer is clearly a sociopath and should be promptly placed in Dublin Bay.

ceadaoin.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121058058#Comment_121058058

Yes it's very interesting alright. I mean faced with choice of cancer or an mRNA shot then I'd probably choose the shot. The benefits clearly outweigh any risks in that case. For COVID? Nah, I'm grand thanks. Don't know why that makes some people so angry tbh!

nachouser

I miss the lad on here who bought a bunch of polo neck jumpers so he could avoid wearing masks. He'd just roll up the neck and he was grand.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121058267#Comment_121058267

Dunno why you're angry about it.

Flinty997

Hindsight is 20:20 vision.

Really should start a thread on how to fix the next pandemic without knowing anything about it.

fun loving criminal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121057955#Comment_121057955

That's just silly. Yet no distancing, no masks, no precautionary measures in most or all indoor spaces now.

Edit: that twitter post is from May 2021. So they didn't introduce social distancing outdoors now.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121058306#Comment_121058306

I think he suffocated eventually :)

Imagine trying to do that with an angora jumper. A mask would be more comfortable.

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121059167#Comment_121059167

Very good :))

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121053297#Comment_121053297

This is completely false and I refuse to believe you don't know it. Whatever you are and whatever your agenda, you are not stupid.

There was and is little to no protection from infection and little to no protection from 'passing it on'. How you could claim otherwise is beyond me. This is long beyond a doubt. At some point the most vaccinated countries had the highest infection rates. After!

Whatever remains is the claim that it protects from serious outcomes. Which conveniently is very hard to prove one way or the other. Especially when in many cases the required datasets to do so were 'accidentally' never collected to begin with.

Same as for the the 'not wearing off' thing. Well you could argue if it didn't protect much to begin with then of course it isn't wearing off. But let's assume for a moment it did offer some protection. If it wasnt 'wearing off' how come it was argued that we need boosters every 12, then every 6 then in some instances/countries every 3 months?

Sorry none of what you claim there makes any sense.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121062400#Comment_121062400

It's not false. The trials showed high effectiveness in this regard. The problem was that the virus mutated. The vaccines still reduced transmission (keyword: reduced) but were unable to "stop" Covid.

In a basic way:

Smallpox - didn't mutate - vaccines stopped it dead

Influenza - mutated - we need boosters every year

Whatever remains is the claim that it protects from serious outcomes.

It's a fact. Up to 90% reduction in hospitalizations/deaths (depending on variant). The numbers on the right are age-adjusted mortality rates per 100,000.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121062400#Comment_121062400

I have cited studies, across this forum and recently on this thread proving what I have said. Demonstrably disproving your false claims of "little or no protection." The reason why the boosters are needed is that the protection wanes and needs to be topped up. However that doesn't negate the significant protection against infection established in the studies during the period of the study which was at least 6 months. If you're not infected you can't pass it on. The protection against infection was more effective versus earlier strains, but the discussion was about 2021 and the decision to get vaccinated and the justification for vaccine passes. The protection against severe covid was also irrefutably established with more durable protection and also versus different variants. All of this has very important societal wide impact during a pandemic.

So you are not just wrong about the data, your claims about the data are wrong e.g. "Which conveniently is very hard to prove." Eh no, it has been proven over and over in study after study, as well as the real world experience in ICUs with figures cited on this thread.

You haven't even tried to challenge the figures presented. Therefore this is an entirely bad faith argument. Of course it doesn't make sense to you when you don't even try to engage with the evidence.

By contrast you present zero facts, zero evidence, just misinformation and semantic games. At this point it is fair to call it anti vax disinformation.

Sconsey

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121062400#Comment_121062400

There was and is little to no protection from infection and little to no protection from 'passing it on'.

Do you understand the difference between SARS-COV2 and Covid 19? The vaccines do not prevent you from getting infected with the virus (that would be fairly impossible) , they have limited effect reducing the risk of spreading the virus, they have an overwhelming effect of preventing serious disease.

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121062519#Comment_121062519

So because your so-called studies aren't holding up to real-world observations you need to discredit me as anti-vax. Only it's quite a ridiculous statement to make about someone who got three doses of it.

I'm not anti-vax. I took them. I actually trusted those broad statements about their efficacy. And I'm still not saying they're bad. They didnt harm me. But what I'm saying is that real-world observations do not support the claims that were made about them. And you can cite your studies all day long the real-world data is simply what it is and it can't be talked away.

Your attempt to brand me as anti-vax is a new low even for someone as blinkered and dogmatic as yourself.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121063637#Comment_121063637

What real-world data are you pointing at which contradicts Dohnjoe's above figures?

Given all the information out there, I seriously question people who still don't understand how vaccines work .

From a pure vaccine perspective, the COVID vaccines, of all types, protein with adjuvant, adenovector or mRNA, are highly effective.

I still think it would take a move to nasal vaccines, vs. intra-muscular, to maintain effectiveness past 6 months for infection rates, but also, given the high vaccination rates, it's likely an unnecessary move at this stage.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121063637#Comment_121063637

In trials the vaccines performed very well against the key strain of Covid at the time. So naturally there was a lot of hope.

Unfortunately the virus mutated, and those other newer strains became dominant. Some individuals confused initial hope as some sort of "promise" that the vaccines would stop Covid.

Despite this broad hope, there were many articles and news reports urging people to be cautious about the vaccines, that they may not be as effective in stopping Covid due to the various new variants emerging.

Anti-vax is a way of thinking, quite a few anti-vaxxers are themselves vaccinated, they just have a particular irrational agenda against the Covid vaccines.

The vaccines have been remarkably safe, very effective in reducing deaths and have saved countless lives. We just don't have the medical technology to completely "stop" Covid (or seasonal flu)

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121063637#Comment_121063637

The studies cited on the thread are a mix of both clinical trials and real world studies. So there you go, straight off the bat with a falsehood. And always the falsehoods fall on the side of anti vax misinformation. Always. Contributions from you defending the vaccines noticeable by their absence.

You aren't even trying to engage with the evidence presented on this thread, forum and in the media because you know you cannot. Always the "blinkers" are about refusing to engage with the actual evidence in support of vaccines - actual real world evidence from studies of real world data including ICU admissions. So yes, that is an anti vax debating position.

Your claims have no credibility.

eggy81

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121040824#Comment_121040824

Pretty much the opposite amongst almost everyone I know. And they would be from a huge varying range of ages and social sectors. Very few people seem to be happy they took the vaccine imo.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121064590#Comment_121064590

If they all received the vaccine, great, they all now have less risk of dying due to Covid.

Not sure what you mean about the "satisfaction", my only guess is that some mistakenly believed the vaccine would prevent them from ever getting Covid.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121064845#Comment_121064845

You can just assume the numbers show 10x real world efficacy for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated.

Honestly, I can understand people looking for, or waiting for, the longitudinal studies to understand the nuances, but the vaccines working and being effective across all the things you want vaccines to be effective for is in the "water is wet" category, scientifically speaking, leaving those who want to re-litigate it, solely in the cranks and loons groupings. The vaccines effectively knocked about 1-2 years off the pandemic, depending on the numbers of deaths we were willing to accept to get back to some sort of normality (if you're in the "there was no pandemic" category, then there's no hope for you).

pjohnson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121059312#Comment_121059312

The "anti" crowd always brought the best hysteria with some of the utterly insane schemes they'd cook up to be "edgy" and "cool".

ClaudeVercetti

I was living in the UK until the end of 2020 and Contact Tracing was taking off that summer before the vaccines. You weren't aloud in anywhere until you scanned a QR code on the door and gave your details to a .gov.uk domain. Doubt anyone would give up that level of information to a government nowadays if it were to happen again.

And then you had the Irish app that geolocated you and let you know if you were within close proximity to someone who had a positive test. That was handy at the time but crazy how much we were monitored at the time in hindsight.

Red Silurian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121059167#Comment_121059167

Previous pandemics have been mainly caused by coronavirus or influenza viruses the next one will likely be caused by one of those two and we know how to beat them

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121083223#Comment_121083223

It was all to the reduce the spread. Some of it worked, some of it didn't work as well as planned.

If there's another pandemic, depending on severity, it's likely we will have similar measures/restrictions to reduce the spread/pressure on health systems.

Former Former Former

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121083223#Comment_121083223

And then you had the Irish app that geolocated you and let you know if you were within close proximity to someone who had a positive test. That was handy at the time but crazy how much we were monitored at the time in hindsight.

But it was all 100% voluntary, and while loads of people downloaded the app, very few used it or knew how to use to its full extent. The actual level of monitoring achieved was probably minute.