This morning.
Via Irish Times:
A GP who started getting seizures within days of receiving her first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine is urging the Government to grant digital Covid-19 vaccination certificates to people like her for whom a second dose is contraindicated.
….She told The Irish Times her neurologist, GP and microbiologist have advised her against getting a second dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Because of this she is ineligible to be granted a Covid-19 vaccination certificate.
“I am advocating on behalf of myself and other people in my position, who wish to complete the vaccine programme but due to genuine serious medical reasons cannot and therefore are not afforded the benefits associated with a Covid-19 vaccination certificate and are now facing exclusion from certain services and potentially work,” she said.
GP urges Covid-19 vaccine cert for those hit by acute first-dose reaction (Irish Times)
Meanwhile…
EXHIBIT A: Racial apartheid
EXHIBIT B: Medical Apartheid
— David Thunder (@davidjthunder) August 17, 2021
There are big problems with the system for people who got vaccinated in other jurisdictions too. I know of a few people who got vaccinated in the US, who’re now completely cut off from the Digital Cert. Despite it being with a fully EMA approved shot (Pfizer/Moderna) in a first world country.
Don’t think many places are checking them. At least not scanning them. Too much hassle.
People are just showing their borrowed mates certs if they don’t have one.
Box ticking exercise.
Dunno, I’ve been to quite a few pubs that are scanning and matching to IDs diligently. The bigger issue is the use/requirement of the Digital Cert for travel rather than pubs, too.
All it takes is for the system to be enforced slightly more rigorously and people vaccinated abroad (and others like the person in the original post) get very badly screwed over, through no fault of their own.
For travel I’d just get a PCR or antigen test.
The few local pubs and restaurants I’ve been to, haven’t asked at all for the certs. But honestly I haven’t been out on the lash in town in a while. I’ve got too used to having people over to the house instead.
Much more chill
But sure this is all supposed to end on Sept 1st right?
Sure it will… ;)
That makes your panties wet, does it Micko?
Dude you’ve been acting really odd the last few days.
All good?
It was a Yes/No question Micko…
Thunder? More like a moist drizzle.
Chainsaw? More like grooming scissors..
Forgot your other log in Giggidy?
That’s unsurprisingly weak. I ain’t Giggidy..
Of course you’re not, dearie.
Indeed I’m not. Looks like Giggidy resides in your head.
Rent free in your head there Daisy. How’s Bruce Y Lee doing these days? Any words to the wise from him? I’m sure he has a good old following of old maids. Fill us in please.
Does mentioning him bring you to a Brucey bonus?
You tell me. You quoted him.
Racial apartheid – taken into dingy police cells and beaten to death.
Medical Apartheid – have to sit outside when supping pints until your vaccine appointment comes through.
They’ve stepped back from the Jews in Nazi Germany analogy and moved on to being black in the American south. Nothing like privileged white men telling us that having to eat and drink outside is EXACTLY THE SAME as being lynched for looking the wrong way at a white woman.
“taken into dingy police cells and beaten to death.”
Is that not a race or hate crime you’re describing there though.
“The definition of apartheid refers to a political system where people are clearly divided based on race, gender, class or other such factors”
Apartheid and segregation don’t change their definitions just because you find yourself on the “winning team” lads.
Surely you wouldn’t deny the existence of Gender apartheid?
So why make fun of this woman worried about medical apartheid.
She’s concerned she may lose her job as a GP
Nobody is making fun of the woman. It’s the stupid tweet underneath.
Again just coz you’re on the winning team doesn’t mean it’s not real.
So, is gender apartheid real?
How does it relate to playing the victim for not being allowed drink inside because you won’t get vaccinated?
Yeah yeah great. I’ve had Covid. No vax needed.
So, is gender apartheid real then?
Have you tried google?
Good luck distinguishing some abstract definition of Apartheid from Apartheid as it was actually practised, and which involved people being beaten to death in dingy police cells. Attaching it as a label to a public health measure is pure priveleged contrarianism.
‘So why make fun of this woman worried about medical apartheid.’
Not making fun of her. She’s in a tough spot, not of her own making, but the spot derives from a number of considerations all of which derive from external objective factors – the pandemic, the nature of her job in dealing with sick people on a daily basis, her unfortunate reaction to the first shot, whether one shot is sufficent to guarantee the safety of her patients. Conflating these issues with Apartheid, hich she did not, so well done on doing so on her behalf, is not only stupid, it’s irresponsible, and prevents dealing with the situation as rationally and fairly as possible.
Right. So only people who were beaten to death in cells experienced apartheid then.
Yeah. Just dodge the question on gender apartheid Nigel. Just like Daisy.
Because you know you can have several different types of apartheid. It’s just that this one suits you right? ;)
Go back to referring to yourselves as like the Jews in Nazi Germany. That one was a doozy!
I’m not dodging the question, it’s a facile, self-serving, petulant, hyperbolic comparison. The more incidents of actual systemic discrimination you invoke, the more facile, self-serving, petulant and hyperbolic it appears. You are opposed to public health measures. Fine. Next time there’s a boil-water notice in Galway, tell them not to bother, it’s discrimination, drink away.
That whole statement might mean something if it wasn’t you who was saying it.
There isn’t a day goes by that you don’t virtue signal in some shape or form.
Glass houses etc.
If you had arguments to make against my supposed ‘virtue signalling’ you wouldn’t have to fall back on a term like ‘virtue signalling.’
I honestly don’t have the free time to go back and forth.
I used to, but these days, proving people wrong on the Internet is too time consuming.
That, and there’s more to life if I’m honest..
When was this fabled before-time when you used to prove people wrong? The eighties?
That comment applies equally to you..
Have another go..
Three out of every five of your comments are basically that comeback. So, the seventies.
Having trouble parsing?
If ever there was a case of two bald men fighting over a comb…
That type of apartheid you describe is based on immutable characteristics. Characteristics that describe you as a person. Whether or not you’re vaccinated does not qualify under any of those. It’s so glib to act like there’s any direct comparison, and shows a total lack of understanding or empathy with people that suffer discrimination. Using people’s suffering as a mechanism to bolster your own want to drink indoors and put businesses / staff at risk is really really bottom of the barrel stuff.
Yeah, I gave up on the anti-vaxxers and their waffle “freedom fighting”. It’s a load.
Anti-vaxxers are discriminated against and it is akin to racial discrimination and genocide. There is a direct link between them and the jews of Nazi occupied Europe, the natives of South Africa, the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, the Tutsis of Rwanda and also the Cambodians under the Khmer Rouge. The anti-vaxxers are the reincarnation of all freedom fighters and those who stood against authoritarian and evil regimes who sought to exterminate groups of people for who they are or what they think.
The Irish state with its pitiful ICU capacity and desire for caution and the fact this is a relatively new virus and subject to change is just a cover for this wicked and homicidal regime that we live under.
My young fella is dressing up as Deadpool this Halloween FYI.
“ and put businesses / staff at risk is really really bottom of the barrel stuff.”
At risk… really?
How am I putting anyone at risk?
This is make belief stuff.
Unvaccinated people are more likely to be infected, and are infectious for a longer period of time. More likely to infect a staff member which puts the business at risk of having to close for two weeks.
It’s fairly straightforward micqo.
That’s how.
This issue is not just people who have adverse reactions, there is quite a number of others whom under medical advice cannot have it either.
But as per unusual it is a half baked idea which by and large is being ignored, especially outside city centres and definitely in the border regions.
After being closed for 18 months, businesses cannot afford to be turning away groups of people because of this silly nonsense. It only takes one in a group for them all to go somewhere else of course.
These people should be accommodated because they’re genuine cases as it’s not a case of they won’t get vaccinated, but that they can’t. A letter from a GP or specialist outlining the reason should be enough for an exemption.
“should be”
In otherwards, you haven’t a clue..
Not true- no exemptions are accepted and besides- why should you have to broadcast your personal medical information to some goon at a door of a venue?
Immunocompromised individuals for example- are you saying that someone should be disclosing their HIV status in order to be admitted into a bar or restaurant? On your bike.
And no, because some people who are HIV+ can take it does not mean all can- it is very much a case by case basis.
Why would immunocompromised people who can’t get vaccinated go into venues before herd immunity has been acheived? Possibly they have to stay at home and listen to people like you arguing against public health policies designed to provide them with some protection.
Because herd immunity is never going to be achieved (have a look at how Israel is doing currently, despite being “finished” their vaccination program for months)?
So said immunocompromised person may have decided its time to at least partially go back to normal life, accepting the risks. People can’t cower at home for years indefinitely.
Because someone is immunocompromised does not necessarily mean they are at a higher risk of developing CoVid-19- it just means that they have been advised not to take these vaccines- as I said, it is all on a case by case basis.
Stop looking for loop holes to fit your narrative- some people have been advised not to have it- end of.
Actually immunocompromised people (as a group) or your average person that is immunocompromised, is more likely to be infected, and if they do get infected they are more at risk from developing severe symptoms. They are also not all advised against taking the vaccine (most are and most do).
And actually the vaccines have been deemed safe for HIV+ patients as long as they are not allergic to any of the vaccine ingredients. They actually vaccinated HIV+ people in Dublin earlier than they would have been vaccinated if they had been negative. Where are you pulling your info from? I know you rely on vague modifiers (if, can be, necessarily, might be, maybe) but a lot of it is just total lies. What motivates you?
Anyone who can’t take the vaccine is by definition counting on everyone who can to do so, for their own safety. There are no loopholes, there is only risk reduction. And you are arguing against that.
You are the one arguing a loophole by saying all such people should stay at home?
It is their personal risk assessment upon which they make their decisions- and they should be discriminated against just because it does not suit your narrative.
They have to make their personal risk assessment realistically, with no reference to your useless and irrelevant hysteria about discrimination and Apartheid. And wouldn’t that risk-assessment look more hopeful if there weren’t people like you out there arguing against risk reduction.
“hysteria” “discrimination”
“people like you..”
What’s he like Nigel?
@Oro- my information is coming from two HIV+ people I know who have been advised not to take it. In fairness they have been HIV+ for a very long time and it has taken its toll on their health.
As for other immunocompromised, as pointed out by Zaccone below, it is entirely their own decision as to if they wish to take risks or not- they should not be discriminated against either way.
And there are other groups of people who for what ever reasons would be very silly to take it- pregnant women for example- because there has been no testing done on them at all.
@ Nigel- for someone who claims to champion minority rights you are arguing a very shaky majoritive one these days- especially as those who are vaccinated can also infect others.
I’m sure there are certain HIV+ people being advised against being vaccinated but it is a minority and not representative of people that have seroconverted as a group. It’s not helpful to talk only about extreme cases when discussing a group of people.
They’re not being discriminated against, in Ireland discrimination is legally defined and covers very specific categories and this just does not qualify. Why does every issue in Ireland have to come down to how it relates to the pub?!?
Secondly, how often were people going out for dinner pre-lockdown? I’ve never seen such a fuss over such a fluff activity. Comparing it to apartheid or the Holocaust is just totally deluded, and so disrespectful.
…we’ve had our fun…
You’re determinedly making a category error. This isn’t about a persecuted minority, it’s about a public health emergency. It’s a rough time to be immunocomrpomised, not because of discrimination, but because of the risks to their health.
‘especially as those who are vaccinated can also infect others.’
If the vaccine is as useless as you keep dishonestly claiming, the immunocompromised are, as the site filter would have it, completely fupped.
@Oro- some HIV+ people cannot frequent venues anymore- perhaps not the majority but definingly some- consult Gráinne down the clap clinic for more details?
No not the majority, not even a significant minority. I believe lots of people are not frequenting venues right now for a variety of reasons. Discrimination it still ain’t.
I won’t contact Grainne – I thought we were supposed to be keeping medical information private? Or is that only when it suits you?
“No not the majority, not even a significant minority.”
Yes darlin- keep on bluffin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea1uEz0i3d8
It’s the truth, I know you’re not familiar with it.
You should read the below links, they’re very straightforward and I think would help you understand the relevant factors in how HIV+ people are navigating COVID-19. You seem to be a bit confused honestly.
In relation to what we’ve been discussing, the most relevant quote would of course be:
“If you are living with HIV, you will be encouraged by your HIV clinic to avail of a COVID-19 19 vaccine.”
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/covid-19.html
https://www.hivireland.ie/living-with-hiv/hiv-and-covid-19/
‘What’s he like Nigel?’
Ideologically opposed to public health measures, for some reason.
I am on the gin and can’t be bothered.
Genuine question, if she can’t have a second dose of AZ can she have Pfizer/Moderna instead, that’s what would happen in the UK