‘I Must State I Have No Confidence In NPHET’

at | 124 Replies

Dr Vincent Carroll joins a small but growing group of Irish medical dissenters.

He must be destroyed.

Previously: It’s a Small Club

Meanwhile…

GB Declaration?

Tedros?

Meanwhile…

124 thoughts on “‘I Must State I Have No Confidence In NPHET’

  1. d

    quite depressing that society has to rely on the medical profession for counter argument. where are the civil liberties groups (not talking about these right wing groups), law lecturers, opposition parties.

    Fair play Vincent.

    Reply
      1. E'Matty

        except you don’t listen to any epidemiologists who deviate from the Covid scaremongering narrative like Professor John Ioannidis of Standford, for example. John P. A. Ioannidis is a Greek-American physician-scientist, writer and Stanford University professor who has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, and clinical research. Ioannidis studies scientific research itself, meta-research primarily in clinical medicine and the social sciences.

        In August, Ioannidis’ meta-analysis of antibody tests estimated the median infection fatality rate of COVID-19 at 0.24%.

        Or perhaps Anders Tegnell, Swedish State Epidemiologist – ”With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden, we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport.”

        There are dozens of such epidemiologists worldwide questioning the fearmongering and lockdown approach to this virus.

        Reply
        1. Formerly known as @ireland.com

          These posts and comments are getting old. It is not just the death rate.

          How many hospitals, with ICU beds and staff, do you think Ireland needs? Are you volunteering to work in one, mask-free, if there is nothing to worry about?

          The virus is not just about the death toll, it is about long term effects on survivors and the capacity of the medical system to manage all the cases.

          I think you will find that most lockdowns occur after other measures fail, partly because a lot of people don’t take it seriously. What is your strategy?

          Reply
          1. E'Matty

            “The virus is not just about the death toll, it is about long term effects on survivors and the capacity of the medical system to manage all the cases.” yet people like you ignore all other illnesses and disease with your myopic irrational obsession with this virus. How many delayed diagnosis cancer deaths across age groups are acceptable for your “Only Covid matters” kind? How do you think the State will pay for medical services in the coming years when you and your kind have bankrupted the country? Have you any awareness at all of the damage to health caused by poverty and deprivation, which you are condemning hundreds of thousands, if not millions to?

            As for working in hospital, my sister heads up one of the departments in one of the State’s largest hospitals. She is terrifed of the wave of death to come from non Covid illnesses. I wonder how many women of all ages will die as a result of this? https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40062614.html – Just 10% take up cervical check invitation since screening restarted.

            Nah, people like you don’t care about anything else except a virus with a miniscule fatality rate which affects almost exclusively those already on their death beds (only 5% of those who died were admitted to ICU). You are prepared to destroy countless lives, businesses and communities, all because you have been whipped into a state of hysteria by scaremongering narratives on this virus.

            My strategy is to recognise this virus for what it is, a reasonably dangerous virus that requires we take measures to protect the very elderly with underlying conditions as best we can and then, everyone else get on with living. There is no evidence to support the claim that this would result in large numbers of deaths, as so many of the fearmongers and sheep are prone to claiming.

  2. jockey

    Why don’t we keep the lockdown guidance for the old and vulverable (and anyone who wants it) and let the rest of society go on? I mean they’re having to live as if we’re not adhering to the guidlines anyways.

    Reply
    1. Micko

      Yup

      Seems like a plan

      Maybe communities could rally together and protect the vulnerable, by doing shopping, errands etc

      Instead of looking out the windows and informing on each other.

      Reply
    2. Junkface

      Agreed. It’s all getting very boring now, the conflicting arguments. Didn’t they also find that a young guy in the USA got covid 19 twice, first March, then again in May? So there is no herd immunity

      Reply
      1. E'Matty

        If there is no herd immunity as you suggest, what is it people think the much vaunted vaccine will provide? Either the immune system can be activated to produce an immunity to this virus, or it can’t. If it cannot, how are vaccines expected to provide our solution? If this is the case, does it not reinforce our need to learn to live with the virus and not continue these destructive government policies, which merely push this issue further down the road whilst causing untold damage to our economy and society?

        I might also add that, a few cases of reinfection DO NOT mean that most people cannot in fact build an immunity to the virus. SARs, the closest cousin to SARS-CoV-2, does allow for an immunity to build, and indeed, it was this prior immunity which is believed to have played a role in the lower death rates experienced by many Asian countries.

        Reply
        1. Junkface

          Vaccines provide immunity for periods of time. Flu vaccine does this every year if you take it in Autumn, it lasts all through winter and Spring. This is common knowledge. It has been proven over and over again.

          Reply
          1. E'Matty

            How does a vaccine work? Does it not try to replicate in a controlled manner the infection of the body and trigger an immune response? If so, how would it do so if no such immune response exists for SARS-CoV-2?

          2. SOQ

            All vaccines do is to trick the bodies immune system into thinking it has the pathogen so that it mounts a defence and can recognise the real thing if or when it comes along.

            For it to claim the eradication of a flu it would require 100% uptake and that is never the case.

            Flu, even with a vaccine, can kill more people than CoVid-19 of course- it can be very hit and miss.

          3. Junkface

            Flu has never killed 215,000 people in less than a year in the USA. Covid 19 is more dangerous than Flu. Fact.

            Also, have we ever tried to eradicate the Flu? No. We take a vaccine to avoid the worst effects of Flu and therefore passing it on also.

            Good Lord! No more!

          4. SOQ

            And neither did CoVid-19 because that figure is both ‘with’ and ‘from’. And if like the UK, all fatalities where an individual died with 28 days of testing positive is included- no matter from what.

          5. Cian

            @Junkface – you are wrong.
            There are lots and lots of different strains of the flu and they keep mutating.

            Each year, they try to predict which strains are likely to be worst and that year’s flu vaccine will inoculate you from the three/four chosen strains. There should be long-term immunity from those strains. If they get it right (and no other strains appear), then there is a weak flu season (only non-vaccinated people and/or small numbers of other strains appear). If they get it wrong, there is a strong flu season (people simply don’t have a vaccination for the strain that is out).

          6. E'Matty

            @ Cian, I would actually agree with your comment but would also add that even if they get the flu strain correct for a vaccine, the efficacy rate for flu vaccines is circa 50% so under perfect conditions, 50% of recipents would still be susceptible/vulnerable to that particular strain of the flu.

          7. Junkface

            @Cian

            I never said there was not more than one strain of the Flu. In fact a couple of months ago right here we talked about the different strains of covid 19 on different continents. Some seem to be more dangerous than others.

            From personal experience. If I have had the Flu vaccine (4 years I’ve done this), I did not catch the Flu that winter, while some of my friends and co-workers have at some point caught it and been out sick for the week.

            Honestly, enough of this amateur epidemiology from everyone. No one is convincing anyone else of anything! Nobody knows how to read the data or studies like a professional, unless that is your actual job.

            Err on the side of caution by following the hygiene and mask rules. Let’s be smart and use technology and ventilation equipment to live with the virus in indoor public spaces this winter. No national lockdowns, just small local ones for serious outbreaks. We need to get people working again and having some sort of social life even if it is not fully back to normal.

          8. Cian

            @E’Matty
            You’re right. the vaccination isn’t 100% effective because the flu keeps mutating. So even when the correct strain is included in a vaccine, by the time you are exposed to the flu the strain it will have mutated slightly.

            We can’t eradicate “the flu” because “the flu” it isn’t a single thing – it is a set of slowly mutating strains.

      2. SOQ

        Actually that is not quite true Junk- he was infected with two different strains which are effectively two separate- albeit related- viruses.

        Reply
          1. SOQ

            That you dismiss anyone who challenges your mindset as a “conspiracy theorist” says a lot more about you than me of course.

            Even from your link

            “A comparison of the genetic codes of the virus taken during each bout of symptoms showed they were too distinct to be caused by the same infection.”

            That means two separate strains.

          2. Junkface

            From the article :

            “25 March – First wave of symptoms, including sore throat, cough, headache, nausea and diarrhoea
            18 April – He tests positive for the first time
            27 April – Initial symptoms fully resolve
            9 and 26 May – He tests negative for the virus on two occasions
            28 May – He develops symptoms again, this time including fever, headache, dizziness, cough, nausea and diarrhoea
            5 June – He tests positive for the second time, and is hypoxic (low blood oxygen) with shortness of breath

            Scientists say the patient caught coronavirus twice, rather than the original infection becoming dormant and then bouncing back. A comparison of the genetic codes of the virus taken during each bout of symptoms showed they were too distinct to be caused by the same infection.”

            Does it, or does it not say that he caught covid 19 twice? Yes it does. Technicalities aside.

            If you link to articles on twitter posted by nut jobs like Jim Corr, and others similar, then yes, I think you are a conspiracy theorist. End of.

          3. SOQ

            The article clearly states that it was two separate strains- just like you can catch two separate strains of the flu- even in the one year.

            That they both have the same name makes no difference to the body’s immune system because his clearly did not recognise them as being such.

            Maybe we are all like that- who knows- but given the emerging evidence of cross immunity from other corona viruses- unlikely.

          4. John Smith

            @Junkface
            ‘BORING!’
            That is hardly an appropriate response to the valid point that SOQ has made about the two different strains.
            Does the case you quote show that Covid 19 can be caught twice? Only that it can IF the strains are different. That is not boring. It is a demonstrated fact. However, this neither proves nor disproves whether the SAME strain can be caught twice and that is what is the relevant question, as far as this line of discussion goes.
            Flu vaccines only work against the strains they are designed to work against. A Covid 19 vaccine might be expected to be similarly limited in its usefulness.

          5. Cian

            @SOQ
            but given the emerging evidence of cross immunity from other corona viruses- unlikely.
            Are you suggesting that if someone has exposure to SARS, they are immune from Codid…but also saying that if someone has had one strain of Covid the are not immune to another strain of Covid.

            That seems, illogical.

          6. SOQ

            SARS is just another name for SARS-Cov-1 and is similar to SARS-CoV-2 which is what causes CoVid-19. There appears to some cross immunity not just between those two also some other corona viruses.

            I assume this is why Sunetra Gupta is of the view that community immunity is reached at around 20% of the population.

          7. Cian

            @SOQ
            I assume this is why Sunetra Gupta is of the view that community immunity is reached at around 20% of the population.

            is community immunity different to herd immunity?

          8. SOQ

            No, it is just a better term. Herd has other connotations.

            So says Sunetra- my main woman at the moment.

    3. george

      Why don’t we? We don’t because its an infectious disease and that makes no sense. It spreads from people not following guidelines to people who are.

      Also more cases means more hospitalisations and there is already hospital overcrowding every winter. An overcrowded hospital is a great environment for covid-19 to do maximum damage in. As rates in the general population rise it also becomes increasing difficult to keep it out of nursing homes (there are currently several outbreaks in nursing homes). The people who work in nursing homes have to come in and out. Higher case numbers in the community also makes it more difficult to prevent older people and those with medical conditions living in their own homes from becoming infected. These people may live with family members and even if they live alone they can’t avoid all contact with the outside world.

      Reply
      1. Janet, dreams of big guns

        just as well our government have been busy spending the last six months prepping for the winter with extra beds etc, a logical step if you were worried

        Reply
          1. Cian

            Sweden called a bed with a ventilator and a nurse an ICU bed.

            From your link: “some hospitals in Sweden classified coronavirus care as intensive if a ventilator was involved.”

            “[Mälarsjukhuset hospital] opened new intensive care units in other parts of the hospital. This meant having 14 beds in the postoperative room, six beds in cardiology and six beds in the surgical ward.[ …] they received old ventilators from the National Board of Health and Welfare’s reserves, and were able to use anaesthetic machines. “

          2. SOQ

            Does it really matter if they called them Intensive Care or High Dependency Cian?

            They ramped up their facilities at double speed to accommodate what was predicted- which is to their credit.

            Sweden obviously has a more granular approach to their degrees of care because they started at such a low ICU base. They most likely accessed what was required independent of what was going on elsewhere.

            Said ‘modellers’ are now coming clean this week and admitting that they were talking horse manure of course.

          3. Cian

            When people think of ICU an image of dedicated rooms with beds surrounded by lots of fancy equipment and trained personal springs to mind (well for me anyway). And if you say the number of beds doubled – the assumption is these are all new beds.

            What Sweden did was put a ventilator beside an existing hospital post-op beds and called it high dependency. While they may have added 500 “ICU” beds to the system…they lost 500 ‘normal’ hospital beds. The HSE wouldn’t have the gall to do that (and if they did they would be slated for it)

            I suspect that those 500 beds have reverted to their previous status now (although the probably have kept the ventilators on standby).

      2. E'Matty

        “It spreads from people not following guidelines to people who are.” How do you come to that conclusion? If a person is following the guidelines, social distancing, hand washing, mask wearing, etc, how would someone else pass it to them?

        Reply
      1. dylad

        Because Broadsheet seems to be an outlet for the baseless uneducated theories from people with rightwing tendencies. This WHO guy is stating that Herd immunity without vaccine is ethically problematic, and it is for us leftist types who don’t want to see people we love get very sick or die from this.

        Reply
        1. E'Matty

          but you guys are happy to ignore all other issues across society and the harm being inflicted on billions by this myopic obsession with a virus with a fatality rate of circa 0.25%. Tell us, how are your suppsoed Left Wing credentials going to address the upcoming problem of mass hunger across the developing world resulting from these lockdown measures and their knock-on impact on the global economy and supply chains? Here’s the NY Times discssuing this very threat – https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/world/africa/coronavirus-hunger-crisis.html
          “The world has never faced a hunger emergency like this, experts say. It could double the number of people facing acute hunger to 265 million by the end of this year.” How many starving children would it take before you think, maybe there are more issues to be considered than just Covid?

          Reply
      2. E'Matty

        Well, given SARS-Cov-2 is a very close cousin of SARS-CoV-1 and that virus was possible to build some immunity to (though all attempts at creating a vaccine ended in cytokine storms and failure for test animals) and this prior SARS immunity is believed to have some role in the lower death rate due to SARS-Cov-2 across Asian countries, it would seem quite likely that some immunity is indeed possible to develop. A few persons suffering reinfection does not translate automatically to an impossibility of immunity. The numbers allegedly experiencing this are infinitesimally low.

        Reply
        1. SOQ

          So far 5- out of a recorded total of 37.5 million ‘cases’. Given that a world class lawsuit is being prepared surrounding the accuracy of PCR tests- that second figure is highly questionable of course.

          Reply
          1. E'Matty

            Yes, totally agree. PCR does not imply Covid-19 positive. It detects particles or fragments of numerous viruses including the common cold (corona beta) and seasonal influenza (viruses A and B). The creator of the PCR test, Nobel prize in chemistry recipient in1993, Kary Mullis, regarded the PCR as inappropriate for detecting a viral infection. Unfortunately, he passed away last year so the media have avoided him saying as much in public. Quite frankly, it is utterly ridiculous that governments around the world are relying on this clearly flawed test to decide upon extreme and oppressive measures to address this virus. Given the clear flaws involved, I think legal actions where businesses have been adversely affected by the governments measures should have a high probabilty of success. Unfortunately, by then, the damage will have been largely done to the global economy and societies around the world.

          2. Cian

            @E’Matty

            wrong.

            Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say it can’t be used in virus detection

            Social media users have been sharing a quote attributed to the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test, currently being used to detect COVID-19, which says “PCR tests cannot detect free infectious viruses at all”. This quote has been falsely attributed to the inventor, Kary Mullis, and has been taken out of context to falsify its original meaning.
            […]

            https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-pcr/fact-check-inventor-of-method-used-to-test-for-covid-19-didnt-say-it-cant-be-used-in-virus-detection-idUSKBN24420X

  3. Dr.Fart

    being a doctor doesn’t automatically mean you’re smart. you can learn and repeat reems of information and receive your qualifications, but still be an idiot.

    Reply
    1. Charger Salmons

      ‘being a doctor doesn’t automatically mean you’re smart. you can learn and repeat reems of information and receive your qualifications, but still be an idiot.’
      Ahem.
      Reams.

      Reply
  4. SOQ

    That is quite an extraordinary statement by Tedros- he is saying the only way herd immunity can be achieved is through a vaccine despite the fact one was never ever needed for a corona virus before.

    If any comparisons are to be made then it should be with the seasonal flu where vaccine may assist with herd immunity- but they certainly do not create it.

    Well, at least we now know what his agenda is.

    Reply
    1. Jake38

      “he is saying the only way herd immunity can be achieved is through a vaccine despite the fact one was never ever needed for a corona virus before.”

      A vaccine was never needed for a coronavirus before (SARS, MERS) because the world was dead lucky and they were extinguished by public health measures.

      That is decidedly NOT the case with Covid-19. The horse has bolted. We will need a vaccine.

      Reply
      1. SOQ

        Tell me, why is London’s death rates so low in comparison to the rest of Britain right now? Because they have achieved a certain level of community immunity- whether it is enough or not remains to be seen.

        Reply
        1. Junkface

          The wealth gap, people are poorer in northern England. Better diets with fresh veg, less fatty foods, less overweight people, different cultural behavior.

          Reply
        2. Brian

          True, but London’s death rate seems to have been about 140 per 100,000 (disproportionately in poorer areas of London) which is a lot higher than the UK as a whole. It’s a risky gamble to predict that the huge number of Covid deaths will be balanced, in the long run, by deaths possibly prevented by herd immunity. It’s also possible that the large number of deaths in London made people more vigilant about practicing social distancing etc.

          Reply
          1. Cian

            To put London’s 140 deaths per 100,000 into context, the UK as a whole has 63 deaths per 100,000; Peru (the ‘worst’ country in the world) has 101 deaths per 100,000.

  5. Shitferbrains

    ” he looks like he should be sweeping someones yard and not controlling a pandemic ”
    Broadsheet never has a look at the timelines of the wierdos they quote.

    Reply
  6. RuilleBuille

    So this doctor is in the company of Gemma O’Doherty, Trump, UVF, Healy Raes, Jim Corr. Why wouldn’t you believe him.

    Reply
  7. Brian

    The good doctor disagrees with NPHET which is fine. But surely NPHET’s main aim is to protect people’s lives (not their livelihoods) by dealing with public health issues – it’s up to politicians to weigh up the broader issues hence not moving to Level 5. Obviously there is a balance between zero deaths and lifting all restrictions – a level of “acceptable” deaths to allow the country to function even if that is a terrible term.

    I was naturally immunized against measles but I’d rather get my kids vaccinated than take the 1 in 1000 risk that they die from measles. My understanding is that the “herd immunity” strategy could have very high costs without proof that it will result in long-term benefits over and above a vaccine that might be developed in and generally available next year. Also if vulnerable groups are cocooned and the virus spreads among healthy younger people then the economy will probably have to shut down as possibly hundreds of thousands will have symptoms that require them to stop working for at least a couple of weeks. Many others, given the risks, may also not be too keen on being effectively forcibly herd immunized and would rather wait for a vaccine.

    What exactly does “focused protection for vulnerable groups” mean? Lock up granny and other vulnerable groups (including the obese) for 3-6 months to prevent hospitals being swamped and thousands dying?
    Has the mortality rate dropped due to the actions being taken by people (including people who are infected receiving, on average, a lower viral load due to social distancing and face covering? Has extra caution taken by older people (and the fact that they don’t work in places like meat processing plants) made them less likely to become infected than younger people? I don’t know the precise answers to these questions but the doctor’s letter is short on details or how the policy he proposes would actually be implemented. However, at least he is a medical doctor with relevant qualifications, unlike most of the heads (including myself) throwing in their two cents worth.

    Reply
    1. Clampers Outside

      If a vaccine is available by next year, it’ll be the fastest developed vaccine ever.

      More than halving the time it took to develop the Ebola vaccine, the current record holder (contested) of fastest developed vaccine ever… At 4 to 5 years.
      Or some say Mumps was faster at 4 years in the 60s, but that ignores all the research/groundwork laid out during WWII.

      Either way, next year…?
      Not at all likely.

      Reply
    2. SOQ

      It is not up to politicians to just weigh up the broader issues they should be weighing up the other elements of their Public Health strategy- lung cancer diagnosis in the UK is down 50% this year alone- which means most of those missed will probably die. And that is only one form of cancer and not even considering things like mental health and suicides.

      Herd immunity is not a strategy, it is a biological fact and is going to happen one way or the other- what else do you think is going on with students when they go back to university?

      Unlike flu- the targeted demographics of this thing are very clear and young people are much less likely to become ill and definitely much less likely to become seriously ill.

      “focused protection for vulnerable groups” ranges from proper PPE and training in its use in care homes- no transfer of staff between homes, regular testing of those staff and food deliveries to those living in the own homes.

      As for locking up granny- is that not happening already? Why should the entire economy and society be put into deep freeze doing irreparable damage when it is very obvious who the high risks actually are? Do you honestly think that is what granny wants?

      As for throwing two cents in- everyone is affected by this madness so everyone has a right to have an opinion. IMO the problem is that not enough people are speaking out because lives are being absolutely ruined,

      Reply
  8. f_lawless

    Same story playing out in the UK –

    Government advisor on pandemics speaks out against SAGE:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8836699/Britain-not-sacrificed-altar-fighting-Covid-19-writes-Professor-ROBERT-DINGWALL.html

    “Their advocacy of this so-called ‘circuit-breaker’ shows how some members of the scientific community have lost their sense of proportion.

    In essence, they want the entire wellbeing of the nation to be sacrificed on the altar of the fight against Covid.

    But it ignores the devastating social and economic impact of Covid restrictions, and exaggerates the threat the disease poses.

    Of course we must seek to save the lives of those seriously affected by the coronavirus, but we must not be so narrow-minded as to forget people suffering from other conditions and the catastrophic effect of our approach on the economy.

    Here are the key issues lockdown advocates must take on board . . . and on which there has been a deafening silence from some of our leaders:

    – DEATH RATES STILL REMARKABLY LOW
    Even with the recent rise in infections, Covid mortality levels are drastically lower now than at the peak of the pandemic in the spring…

    – DISEASE OF THE OLD AND VULNERABLE
    While every life is precious, the average age of patients who die with Covid-19 is 82.4… Since August, just one otherwise healthy person under 30 has died with the disease…

    – BETTER OUTCOMES
    As knowledge of Covid-19 has deepened, so survival rates have improved significantly. For those admitted to intensive care with Covid, the chances of survival have gone up to 80 per cent..

    – LOCKDOWNS DON’T WORK:
    Much of the North and the Midlands has been living with Covid restrictions for months, yet it has not stemmed the rise in positive cases…

    – THE WIDER IMPACT:
    The wreckage to the economy will worsen physical and mental health. Depression, family breakdown and suicide look certain to rise. Because of the relentless narrow focus by authorities on Covid, other medical conditions are badly neglected.

    – ECONOMIC DISASTER
    The economic damage caused by lockdowns, curfews and restrictions is becoming ever more apparent.
    We now face a winter of lengthening dole queues, growing poverty, and mass business failures. Entire sectors of commercial life face wipe-out, from cinemas to the travel industry….

    ..It’s time for a wider range of ideas and voices to be heard.

    The question we need to ask is: how can we make the transition to living with this virus, rather than being traumatised by a futile fight against it?”

    Reply
          1. E'Matty

            @ Nigel – ah,it’s like the old children’s theatre here. Well, that sounds like something George Soros would tell you to say or a big Jimmy Saville or Jeff Epstein fan would come out with. They’re your team right?

  9. Daisy Chainsaw

    TL:DR but I did see the bit about it only killing old people.

    Gino won’t need the Death with Dignity bill cos pro disease ratlickers will have killed off all the useless aul wans by infecting them.

    Reply
      1. Daisy Chainsaw

        It’s the perfect time to kill off parent & grandparents, far enough away from Christmas to not put a downer on when they spend the inheritance doing the 12 pubs.

        Reply
    1. Micko

      Would ya come off it – you lads don’t give two F’s about old people

      You’re scared for yourselves.

      That’s why you’re ignoring all the evidence around you.

      TL;DR my botty

      Reply
      1. Janet, dreams of big guns

        my old people want their lives back and their children’s lives and futures back, they’ll take their chances instead of going mad with worry and stress in some kind of limbo existence,
        even what they love to talk about most is denied them and their dead friends ( dying from age related disease) ” a good funeral, a good turnout, how many were there ”
        that’s from the horses toothless fed up mouth

        Reply
        1. Micko

          A lot of the older people on my road have expressed the same or similar Janet

          “Sure, I’d rather take chances” and “this isn’t living at all” are frequently said to me

          Not all, but most.

          Reply
          1. Janet, dreams of big guns

            why can’t we ask them what they want, the lives they want to live instead of deciding this for them like they are children, they know their own minds, have a life of experience behind them usually of much harder lives and loss than ours, their opinions are valid, we might not like them,
            I have been told from a young age from my Mother that if she see her quality of life going she is off to meet her maker on a cold mountain, I might not like it but it’s her choice.

        2. Junkface

          @Janet
          Agreed. I think most people are thinking of their parents and grandparents here, that’s why they are being cautious. Not because they are sheeple.

          Worrying about our parents is perfectly natural, especially as they broke their backs working hard to bring you and your siblings up and get you an education. They deserve a proper retirement, and time with their grandchildren

          Reply
          1. Janet, dreams of big guns

            I know,
            look it drives mine mad when my well meaning sis tries to “help” them with stuff for the house or how she thinks they should be living, diet , exercise, whatever, they don’t want it, they have their own way of doing things, they feel patronised, sometimes protecting is suffocating especially if it’s two people who have done things the hard way are very independent and expected their kids to be the same,
            my parents once dropped my brother in the wicklow mountains to do his camping at age 16 alone and picked him up at another location a week later, no bother,
            I brought my sister to birmingham alone age 14 she was 12, no bother,
            they don’t want us hanging out of them making a fuss and telling them how to live like helicopter kids, or not live as it happens.

      2. Daisy Chainsaw

        It’s both actually. I don’t want octegenarian Mammy and Daddy Chainsaw killed off by some dirty, pro disease ratlicker when they’re out and about, wearing masks, keeping their distance, washing their hands etc and I don’t want immunosuppressed me killed off by some dimbulb who done der own research.

        By all means, go kill your parents, but keep your disease ridden mits off mine.

        Reply
        1. Janet, dreams of big guns

          What do you think is best Daisy ? What if there is no vaccine for years ? I’m just voicing the honest feelings of people who fall in the category we are trying to protect, I think it’s important they get heard.
          I’m high risk too, I don’t claim to know about covid , I think the world is on a learning curve and it’s important to consider all angles.

          Reply
          1. Cian

            These two comments encapsulate the whole issue neatly.

            Nobody knows what the best* solution is.
            There are experts on both sides advising mutually exclusive options.
            We are all looking at ourselves and our families and friends and wondering what is right.
            We’re all sick of the whole thing.
            We fear that the “cure” may be worse than the “disease”.
            Whatever options we take, people will suffer and die.
            There is only one certainty: whatever happens the government will be blamed.

            *or even the optimum solution; hell, even the least bad solution.

            [these are my views so no links to sources :-) ]

          2. Daisy Chainsaw

            What’s best? Wear a mask, wash your hands, keep your distance. It’s a bit of common sense, not rocket science.

          3. Daisy Chainsaw

            If people did the basics, we wouldn’t have to resort to a lockdown but people aren’t adhering to the basics.

          4. f_lawless

            @Cian but what is the long term strategy of the government as you see it? To me there seems to be nothing other than “we can and we must suppress the virus by continuing to impose restrictions”. When imposing shutdowns, they only ever talk in terms of short-term time frames “3 weeks to flatten the curve”, “2 week circuit breaker” etc.. these time frames invariably get extended and then where are we left after so much devastation has been caused to Irish society as a result?

            In August Varakar said the government aims ““to keep it as low level as possible and minimise infections, minimise the risk of our health service being overwhelmed, which we’ve done successfully – until such time as we develop herd immunity, which will take an extremely long time”

            Cut to two months later and the justification for the latest restrictions is the risk to the health service being overwhelmed!

            So it’s seems we’re in store for rolling lockdowns for an ” extremely long time” as Leo says.. That’s not a viable strategy.. Maybe it is if you were to have a similar mindset as those transnational capitalist elites who apparently want to use the pandemic as a pretext to implement their so-called “Great Reset” of the world’s economies – break it all down and restructure them again according to their vision – but I don’t think they particularly care about the human suffering entailed in achieving that objective.

            At least the alternative strategy being proposed has a long-term vision and proposes to minimise human suffering by reaching a herd immunity threshold in a structured way but in a relatively short time frame

          5. Itchysays

            @Daisy
            Both your comments…
            {What’s best? Wear a mask, wash your hands, keep your distance. It’s a bit of common sense, not rocket science.}

            {If people did the basics, we wouldn’t have to resort to a lockdown but people aren’t adhering to the basics.}

            …are the absolute truth of why we are where we are now…they’re the reason numbers are not going down all over the country now, yet back in May with the very same measures we achieved an R number of less than 1.
            What changed ?
            Ignorance and arrogance in the face of what you rightly call ‘common sense’ is what has changed.
            People interpreting ‘data’ and ‘science’ to suit their own stance…to endorse their own selfishness…all because it’s an affront to their ‘rights’ to have to wash their hands, wear a mask and keep their distance.
            Rocket science it most certainly is not !

  10. SOQ

    And ANOTHER doctor speaks out.

    Country on verge of a mental health crisis – Dr McDaid

    Dr McDaid believes the country is now on the verge of a mental health crisis.

    “This no longer just involves the usual people you would expect at a time like this, but now people with young families, teenagers, people who see no future due to unemployment, people being ‘treated’ to a daily dose of NPHET which is grossly lacking in helpful, productive information. This information has to date been selective in its distribution.”

    https://donegalnews.com/2020/10/country-on-verge-of-a-mental-health-crisis-dr-mcdaid/

    Reply
      1. SOQ

        For everyone that speaks out Cian- there is plenty who are afraid to and given the witch-hunting that has gone on- no one can blame them.

        The difference with McDaid is- he is politically very well connected.

        Reply
  11. Dell

    Oh great, you found another. You know there are thousands of people working in medical fields who think nphet aren’t recommending enough let alone too much with regard to lockdowns etc.? I have Family members who work with the elderly and are finding it increasingly hard to protect them as figures go up. You know we are not just talking about protecting the elderly, in order to do that we also need to protect all of the People who care for them, those whom care for cancer patients, people who care for their own family members at home, those who work with people with the underlying health issues that now seem to be unrecognised with regards to death rate statistics and those who work in the fields of rehabilitation. This ultra simple moronic view that the vulnerable should be protected and the rest of us just get on with it seems to be willfully ignoring how many people are necessary parts of those peoples lives in order for them to live. In order to protect the vulnerable there has to be a level of control of the virus in the community. I’m really not sure how you don’t get that and at this stage it just looks like you are all ignoring this because it will give you all back the security you want in your lives and to hell with anyone else. Someday you people will be old too, some day you will be amongst the vulnerable and I hope this comes back to bite you so hard.

    Reply
    1. SOQ

      This ultra simple moronic view is that of some of the world’s leading experts in the field but you know better so.

      Nursing home deaths represent FIFTY SIX PERCENT of all the CoVid-19 deaths across Ireland and it is not seven months since the HSE were dumping asymptomatic people into them- where staff did not have even adequate PPE.

      That was far away from what is being recommended as it is possible to get.

      You really have the wrong end of the stick if you think this is about putting vulnerable at more risk- quite the opposite. It is about focused resources and training and upping the standard of care- it can be done and it should be done because otherwise, the overall fatality rate will rise- and it won’t be because of CoVid-19.

      That last section is Dr Martin Feeley’s view btw- I am just paraphrasing.

      Reply
      1. Dell

        This ultra simple moronic view is that of some of the world’s leading experts in the field but you know better so…. I never said I knew better. But I think you will find that the majority of experts dont share your view. But you and the handful that disagree know better so… I would love to actually hear the practical ways that you and your experts will keep the vulnerable safe when the virus is widespread amongst the community. All you all keep saying is that there should be things put in place to keep the vulnerable safe. How exactly do you plan to keep all of the vulnerable and all of the carers for those who are vulnerable virus free? Given the sheer volume of people involved in their lives?

        Reply
        1. E'Matty

          @ ” I would love to actually hear the practical ways that you and your experts will keep the vulnerable safe when the virus is widespread amongst the community.” What specifically is it that you think is being done to protect the elderly now that cannot be done in a scenario where we focus on protecting them and let everyone else go back to living? Surely we would apply the very same social distancing, hand washing, PUP etc around the vulnerable no matter which approach is adopted? What’s the substantive difference as you see it?

          Reply
          1. Dell

            The substantive difference is keeping the infection rate down to a manageable level so that there isn’t so many infected that it becomes unavoidable for vulnerable people or their carers to get it. You are also all conveniently ignoring the many health issues people are left with aftey being infected. On another note, all of you sweden fanboys seem to keep using it as a comparison. How come you don’t use America? I mean you all claim that we are being unfair when we say that irish people are not like Swedish people, but why cherry pick Sweden as you’re example and not America? Are you claiming we are so different to Americans but not the Swedish?

          2. SOQ

            SARS-Cov-2 has been found in the sewage systems of cities long before outbreaks of CoVid-19- what does that tell you?

            The US CoVid-19 strategy was controlled by governors so varied greatly from state to state- too scattered for any sort of comparative analysis- except within.

            Sweden took precautions and also made mistakes but it did not go full Nazi on it’s citizens- which is why they are now holistically in the healthiest place going forward.

    2. f_lawless

      Have you considered the wider picture? Apart from the suffering caused in Ireland, hundreds of millions of people in the developing world have been pushed to the brink of starvation as a consequence of the decision by those in the developed world to continue to impose lockdowns – the disruption to supply chains; developed nations baulking at providing the higher aid packages now needed, etc. Back in April the the chief of the UN’s food relief agency was warning that the developing world was facing widespread famine “of biblical proportions”.

      I’m not so sure history will judge proponents of lockdown policy too favourably. It may be seen as a quite a selfish course of action that only those leading more materially comfortable lives could afford to consider as viable but to the detriment of the world’s poorest.

      Reply
      1. Dell

        Have you read what you just wrote? Because the jist if it is that we should sacrifice one set of vulnerables for another. How exactly do you propose to keep the virus away from the vulnerable here and anywhere for that matter if it’s left go unchecked through the community?

        Reply
        1. f_lawless

          Strawman arguments. Herd immunity is how we have co-existed with viruses since the dawn of humanity. The questions is how do we reach the herd immunity threshold or what’s called “functional herd immunity” while inducing the least amount of suffering either here in Ireland or in the wider world. We can’t wait indefinitely for a vaccine that might not be very effective anyway.

          There’s now a wealth of evidence indicating that up to 80% of a population has some level of cross-immunity from T-cells due to prior exposure to SARS-like viruses. Those people have either a mild or an asymptomatic reaction. The spread is never going to take off exponentially as was feared at the start of the pandemic. As theorised by epidemiologists like Sunetra Gupta, in all likelihood there was widespread community spread of the virus in Europe that went undetected before lockdowns were ever put in place. We are likely already close to the herd immunity threshold already. Even in the US the Wall Street Journal reported this week it’s been discovered that: “Months before travel bans and lockdowns, Americans were transmitting the virus across the country”

          And according to a major new Edinburgh study
          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8817075/Coronavirus-lockdowns-kill-herd-immunity.html

          Lead author Professor Graeme Ackland, from Edinburgh University, said: ‘Unless a vaccine magically appears and is rolled out across the entire population in the next six months, then shutting down society is unlikely to reduce overall deaths.’

          ‘Lockdowns essentially just postpone these deaths and prevent immunity building up… in some cases resulting in more deaths long term.

          ‘The way out of any epidemic is herd immunity, which is when enough people in the population are infected that the virus can’t spread.

          ‘We need to focus on protecting older people who are going to be affected by coronavirus, not people who aren’t.’

          The epidemiologists behind the Great Barrington Declaration give some examples of how so called “Focused Protection” could be implemented and go on to say “A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.” Have you read it? I think it’s unfair just to dismiss that and ask me personally to provide all the answers. I’m not a health professional.

          Reply
          1. Dell

            You’re not a health professional yet you’re willing to dismiss so so so many health professionals in favour of a handful that favour your opinion. Big surprise.

          2. SOQ

            The three authors of that deceleration are not just any old- they are leaders in their fields. Personally I am much more interested in the data analytics which proves that so far this year- there has been no overall increase in fatalities.

            Now you don’t need to have a PhD in epidemiology to ask a common sense question like- how can you have a pandemic with no excess deaths?

            But lockdown or lockdown we should both be able to agree on this- the care of vunerable, particularly in nursing homes, was seriously lacking and that needs to be brought up to scratch NOW.

            As per the Barrington Declaration- proper PPE and training in its use in care homes- no transfer of staff between homes, regular testing of those staff and food deliveries to those living in the own homes.

            It won’t reduce the risk by 100% but it is best practice- and as near as it can get.

    1. Cian

      What the actual fupp?
      What is she saying now? Is it:
      – Garda Adrian Donohoe had comorbidities?
      – Donohoe died “with” gun-hot wounds rather than “of” gunshot wounds?
      – The Swedish police don’t need bullet-proof vests, why do the Garda need them?
      – We can get herd-immunity to being shot

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *