Nurses’ Pledge

at

Connnolly Hospital, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15

Gulp.

This morning/afternoon.

KN writes:

Got this off Telegram, not sure of its authenticity. Anyone?

Meanwhile…

‘Isreal…Kindergarten teachers play “vaccinate”. As soon as a child is “vaccinated”, they are allowed to take off the mask.’

Sponsored Link

Related posts:

The Second Dose Cost Of Caring Vlad The Impaler Warning Shot

50 thoughts on “Nurses’ Pledge”

  3. ManT

    Genuine question but what would happen if a nurse took the jab on instructions by the HSE, developed blood clots and died?

    3. Cian

      Genuine question but what would happen if a patient was being cared for a nurse who wasn’t vaccinated, the nurse contracted Covid, infected the patient, and then the patient died?

  4. K. Cavan

    An appalling decision, pure coercion, breaking multiple Human Rights laws.
    Only absolutely lunatic fascist scum could possibly support this.
    Voilà…

  5. Micko

    So, do they get to keep their jobs and work elsewhere in the Hospital or are they sacked?

    Seems vague about that…

    2. freewheeling

      The Irish Times covered it a while back. Medical Staff who refused the jab were being sent home … on full pay (courtesy of the taxpayer too).

    3. U N M U T U A L

      @terry
      Of course you can… It’s nothing new. If you think every healthcare worker, doctor, nurse etc. has taken every shot recommended to them, then your in luck, I have a few boxes of Pandemrix you might be interested in.

  6. E'Matty

    It was always about getting the entire global population vaccinated. The grotesquely exaggerated threat from the virus is merely the pretext. Watch the dumb herd line up for their shots.

      1. Des

        @Cian. The question on all our lips! Do tell me if you get a coherent response? The great re-set? Datachips?

  7. Gavin

    I get where they are coming from, but there will be legal challenges as it breaches certain human rights. Also, why stop there surely they should be vaccinated for anything that’s possibly contagious.

  8. italia'90

    Welcome to New Xiland boys and girls.
    Social Credit scoring system creeping closer and closer.

  9. Junkface

    Jesus lads and ladies. On what planet would you have unvaccinated doctors and nurses treating the sick? I understand the controversy about not letting people freely enter restaurants without vaccination to some extent, but many people will be hospitalized with other conditions that makes them high risk. Same reason why medical staff must wear PPE. This is a reasonable action.

    1. SOQ

      If it inoculated them then perhaps- but it does not. It may provide some inoculation but certainly does not provide total. And, it does not mention if people who have been previously exposed and have antibodies have to take it.

      The real question is if the company are going to accept liability for any / all injuries caused.

      1. Cian

        It may provide some inoculation but certainly does not provide total

        That is a stupid argument.

        It is like saying that you would only wear a seatbelt in the car if it provides total protection… if it only provides “some protection” you’d refuse to wear it.

        Imagine if there were laws coercing you into wearing a seatbelt in the car! **clutches pearls**

        1. SOQ

          Your assumption is that it proves a substantial level of inoculation- that will only be known come next season, when it is really flying around again- if has not settled into a endemic phase of course- which it probably will.

          You cannot measure the efficacy of any treatment- including HCQ and Ivermectin- when the level of CoVid-19 sickness has dropped to such an extent, as it has now.

          3. Cian

            what about responding to what I wrote not something entirely different.

            Do you wear a seatbelt?

  10. Nigel

    The incredible disconnect between the rhetoric decrying fascism and the simple pragmatism and straightforward morality of having health professionals vaccinated to protect them and their charges is dizzying

    1. Gavin

      But its not straightforward, that’s the problem, if a public body is going to do this they should at least understand that under current law they are opening themselves up to legal challenges, and god knows where that’ll end. If the law is to be changed which it would appear it needs to be in this case, knowing our current gov it will be a rushed hamfisted job that affects everyone’s rights which opens up further legal challenges, or is it going to be done corretly

      1. Nigel

        Doing it might not be straightforward. The obvious need for health care workers to be vaccinated where possible is.

        1. Gavin

          Yep agree, doesn’t change the fact, they are in breach of current law…if it’s even real.

  11. SB

    No official source? Just an anonymous “KN”? Could be one of those bullpoo scaremongering fakes tinfoil-hatters forward on Facebook. Remember last year the “100% true” messages about inside information that the army was about to close down all airports? Though I actually agree with this one.

  12. Joe

    Who knows if there is any validity to Broadsheets Bodger’s post since it supports so much hysterical anti public health measures.

    Only a fool would want to have medical assistance provided by unvaccinated medical personnel during an epidemic.
    There are so many immuno compromised patients in a hospital like the sick undergoing cancer therapy, kidney transplants, leukemia patients even immune suppressed people on steroids for many illnesses like asthma, copd etc.
    I expect the extremely selfish anti vaxxers posting here would also expect unvaccinated medical personnel to remove their masks during open heart surgery such is their moral turpitude.

      1. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

        I was bed ridden for an additional month at home with c-diff after two weeks in Beaumont and I wouldn’t even touch the food in there, lost 20kg and spent the whole time worrying I’d give it to my folks, it’s often lethal for the elderly.

  13. MR.T

    Covid vaccines are “leaky” – you can still contract and spread the virus even when vaccinated.
    The vaccine protects you, not others.

    So with that in mind – why must someone be forced to take a vaccine?

      1. SOQ

        Problem is, at this point, no one really knows what that percentage is. Despite all the weasel words, it is called a CoVid-19 vaccine rather than a SARS-Cov-2 vaccine for a reason- Pharma do not make mistakes like that.

        1. Cian

          We’ve had this discussion before (you were wrong then too).

          – The Rubella vaccine inoculates (most) people from getting the rubella disease, and becoming infectious, when they are exposed to the Rubella virus.
          – The Smallpox vaccine inoculates (most) people from getting the smallpox disease, and becoming infectious, when they are exposed to the Variola virus.
          – The Chickenpox vaccine inoculates (most) people from getting the chickenpox disease, and becoming infectious, when they are exposed to the Varicella zoster virus.
          – The Covid-19 vaccine inoculates (most) people from getting the Covid-19 disease, and becoming infectious, when they are exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus..

          Look at that – when the virus and disease have different names the vaccine is named after the disease not the virus.

          And you are right “Pharma do not make mistakes like that.” Only misinformed idiots do.

          1. SOQ

            I am NOT wrong- your assumptions are speculation and wishful thinking. Nobody knows how effective these injections will be until next peak season.

            So much for science eh? Data science I mean.

            Please refrain from ad hominin attacks- they suggest that even you don’t believe the arguments you are paid to propagate. If Pharma genuinely believed these injections inoculated against SARS-Cov-2, they would be broadcasting it from every mainstream media outlet in the world.

            But they are not.

          2. Cian

            what about responding to what I wrote not something entirely different.

            Vaccines are named after the disease not the virus. True/false?

          3. SOQ

            If they are intended to reduce the symptoms of the disease- then yes. But if they came out with a vaccine for AIDS, we would assume not HIV- why is this any different?

            PrEP as it turns out is mainly effective but, they were very careful not to say so until it could be statistically proven. Post vax still spreads SARS-Cov-2 and some still get sick from CoVid-19 and some still die. That is all we know.

            Given the injury risks, let’s see the data before rushing to any conclusions.

    1. SOQ

      Except the injury risk profile for these injections is different- why is it optional for members of the US military?

Comments are closed.

Broadsheet.ie