HSE Vaccination Lead Damien McCallion at the HSE covid briefing in Dr Steevens’ Hospital this afternoon

This afternoon.

Dr Steevens’ Hospital, Dublin 2.

Via RTE News:

Figures provided by the HSE show that vaccines started this week in paediatric hospitals, the portal will open on 28 December for high-risk children, remaining high-risk children will vaccinated from the week of 3 January in vaccination centres with dedicated clinics.

Jabs for all other five to 11 years old will commence on 10 January.

HSE Vaccination Lead Damien McCallion said the roll-out of booster vaccines for younger age groups will be announced by the end of this week (before Christmas).

“Yesterday was our busiest day for swabbing, the demand curve is increasing, what that translates to clinically we have to wait and see.”

Vaccines for 5-11 year olds from 10 January – HSE (RTÉ)

Leah Farrell/Photocall Ireland

Sponsored Link

Related posts:

In The Fall ‘Kid-Sized Doses’ “A Small Cog” Doing It For The Kids

65 thoughts on “It Has Begun”

  2. bisted

    …children will not be pleased with Pfizer…they will not be pleased that vaccines are being developed specially for them when vulnerable people in poor countries are being denied and face death…

  4. Herr Coach (formerly Buzz Eireann, formerly Hughie Luas)

    Such nonsense. “We’ve run out of adults to vaccinate with an ineffective vaccine, so let’s turn to the kids”.

    Stop digging.

    1. SOQ

      Jacobin magazine is edited and owned by Bhaskar Sunkara, an avowed Marxist and Guardian US columnist- hardly a source of objective truth.

      1. Chris

        The wheeling out of ‘the Koch’ bogey man, should be enough for anyone. These people play both sides of the coin.

      2. Nigel

        ‘ an avowed Marxist ‘

        It isn’t as if you’ve been a big fan of capitalism lately.

        ”the Koch’ bogey man’

        Not as scary as the bogeys men Gates or Soros?

  6. 1-2-1-2

    Just over half (53 per cent) of Covid-19 patients in hospital at present are not fully vaccinated, while 54 per cent of patients in ICU are unvaccinated.

    Unvaccinated cases were two times more likely to be hospitalised, in the period mid-November to mid-December, according to data presented to the briefing. Meanwhile, fully vaccinated cases were four times less likely to be admitted to ICU.

    1. Cui Bono?

      What % of the unvaccinated in ICU and hospital are unable to take the covid vaccines because they’re immunocompromised or too sick from other illness?

      What % of unvaccinated are actually nosocomial infections?

      Get the answers to these 2 questions for a true picture of what’s happening. One source of mine has informed me that 92% of covid cases in Beaumont hospital are nosocomial.

      It’s easy to mislead the public with statistics when they’re withholding vital data.

      2. Haroo

        It sounds like you don’t have the answer to those 2 questions, my paranoid and imaginative friend.

        Your source told you that? Is your source with you now? Are they in the room? Are they always in the room? Do they tell you to do things or do they just give you healthcare stats?

        Cui Bono, optimum medicamentum quies est.

    2. Herr Coach (formerly Buzz Eireann, formerly Hughie Luas)

      53% of what? How many people are you talking here? A couple of hundred people out of a population of millions? 50 people? Sorry, Pal but in a democratic society 85% of people complying with *anything* as good as universal. Get over yourself.

  7. Sailor Jerry

    Only risk kids have from Covid, is some mercenary trying to stick poison into them for a disease they are well suited to deal with, without a clot shot.
    Despicable behaviour.

    2. SOQ

      +1.

      By the law of averages, some of those children are going to end up with injuries- some of which as still unknown. No doubt they will claim ignorance but how those parents are going to live with themselves is beyond me.

  8. Jombom

    I have two boys under 10. Both healthy. Both been grand the last two years unmasked everywhere. Before I am coerced into vaccinating them with jabs that are unnecessary for them (and don’t even protect wider vulnerable members of society too well either) i’ll need an answer to the following:

    Has there been any any long term trial looking at male fertility in relation to young males recieving covid vaccines?

    No? OK then. No it is.

      1. SOQ

        The opinion of two kids under ten?

        Sure, and throw them a packet of fags and a six pack of Dutch Gold while you are at it.

      2. Kali

        Kids under 10 are not old enough to make informed decisions about their health when it involves volunteering for vaccines, that’s why their parents retain that right

      3. Jombom

        Ask them?? Well my 8yo is fairly smart and reads as often as me. Big into science like me too (an understatement). We talk about covid yeah.. they say its a runny nose or bit of a cough or in MOST cases in their class not even sick at all. They consider it as one of the many ways you can get sick, and they understand that like many other viruses (that live inside you right now) people can get sick and die from viruses.

        They also see that most people in their class have missed school from having it, and have been out of school because somebody else beside them has had it. They think their teacher (and a hysterical principal in particular) make “a big deal” out of it.

        So I asked them, yes. They both said they don’t want the vaccine.

          1. johnny

            …yeah feel the same mysel,great that he keeps dropping into the comments section to have a go.
            speaking of standards i and many find his morbid kinda creepy fascination with speculating on cause death repugnant and just ghoulish.

      1. Chris

        Wait, you want long term testing on Thalidomide to see if it affects fetal development? Yes, that would have been a great idea. Numskull.

      2. Jombom

        No Oro, how could I possibly want that? That would be impossible, since they are haven’t hit puberty yet.

        What I don’t want is to give them a vaccine that
        a) has no long term trials associated with fertility
        b) wanes in efficacy after a few months requiring more
        c) doesn’t stop transmission to others, only slows a bit
        d) has side effect risks
        e) is being pushed in a wierd political way by the media complete with same talking points and wrong info
        f) is again going to be used as a means of segregation within society to coerce parents into complying by holding back certain freedoms (just as they did with us adults)
        g) a minority of scientists do think that mass vaccination of healthy humans could be the biggest mistake we’ve ever made.

        1. Oro

          Oh alright, but that’s not what you said initially, you can understand my confusion. You literally asked for a study on fertility in pre-fertile males.

          One note on your list, by rule of implication, your point G means that a majority of scientists do think that a mass vaccination of healthy humans would not be the biggest mistake we’ve ever made. Why would you side with a minority decision over a majority? In terms of a group of experts I mean.

          In terms of the majority / minority relationship we’re looking at in this case (vaccines) I believe the split is proportionally akin to that on evolution. Would you also consider the anti-evolution scientists positions as more attractive?

          2. Jombom

            Yes, i have no problem siding with a minority when the conclusions that brought me there are based on my own scientific understanding. If my own conclusions end up being in the minority I’ve no problem with that.

            No, anti-evolution scientists are not scientists.

          3. Oro

            But your own conclusions are generally anti-scientific in that they are not in line with the vast majority of scientists. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I take it you’re not a scientist yourself?

            Isn’t this just a case of valuing your own (non expert) ‘expertise’ (which is largely emotion based) ahead of a trained expert? It just seems a bit hypocritical to me.

          4. Haroo

            But your scientific understanding is limited compared to people who are trained, work in the field and have a lot of experience dealing with the fundamentals and conplexities of this topic.

            So your conclusions are limited by your scientific understanding which itself is limited comparatively.

            So, the majority may be completely right but because you can’t understand how or why they are right you come to the conclusion they are wrong?

            So of all those with superior knowledge, a minority of experts come to a conclusion. You come to the same conclusion with limited understanding and knowledge (comparatively). And then you decide that the minority are right because your limited and incomplete knowledge has supported their conclusion. But the majority with superior knowledge come to the opposite conclusion and you decide they are wrong?

            I am just searching for the logic here. I am just trying to make sense of how that is justifiable?

          5. SOQ

            It is not the the vast majority of scientists- it is a big Pharma cabal heading up by Fauci who already has form going back to the days of the HIV / AIDS scandal.

            And if you doubt what I am saying then go watch the ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ film- the bad guy was Fauci.

          6. Oro

            Of course why didn’t I think to check Matthew McConnaughey’s back catalogue for the hard truth sooner. Thank you for that great suggestion.

            Funny I would have thought you’d be one of those anti-Hollywood types. You know the ones I mean.

            Speaking of HIV / AIDs and the pharma industry, (and you absolutely don’t have to answer this since it’s none of my biz but I’m interested to know if you want to volunteer the info) do you take prep?

          8. Oro

            But you were advocating for use of ivermectin as a pre exposure prophylaxis non? What’s the diff with prep? Same mechanism. And don’t get at me about long term studies for prep, they’re all there, it’s been around years and years. This is the hypocrisy i mentioned earlier that bothers me.

          9. Chris

            The system has done a great job at bringing the rainbow crew onside, but some have (rightly) cast a weary eye upon proceedings. SOQ hasn’t bought the bull.

          10. SOQ

            @ Oro- in you rush to score tacky points, you are completely missing this one, which is about choice.

            People should have the choice to use either Ivermectin or Truvada, but in the case of Ivermectin, that is not the case.

            The FDA and the US postal service are blocking parcels of Ivermectin, which if you know anything about the HIV/AIDS scandal, means that history is repeating itself.

            Those psychopaths don’t care who they kill in order to get what they want.

            @ Chris- a lot of gay men of a certain age are very sceptical about what is going on right now.

          11. Oro

            Of course taking prep is a choice, but I’m focusing specifically on your actions in this instance. You were pushing ivermectin for use as a pre exposure prophylaxis against covid, yet are against prep for the same function for a different virus. I think that is illogical, and that your motivation is political or ideological rather than scientifically or medically sound.

            But talk in circles about parcels pending if you want rather than address your own inconsistencies.

            Idk wtf you mean about ‘tacky points’ but I would hate to think you were engaging in an ad hominem, since you haaaaate when people do that hehe.

          12. SOQ

            Where did I say I was against PrEP? I said I hade serious reservations about taking it FOR ME. The reasons are none of your business.

  9. Herr Coach (formerly Buzz Eireann, formerly Hughie Luas)

    Next up: Govt Stasi blaming the January weather for schools not opening because it’s too cold to open the windows….

    1. Ronnie

      kids and children

      Hey I’m not one for madanting vaccines either, especially for children. I think these things should always be a personal choice, but why do you anti vaccine brigade always search out stuff to suit your narrative. Nobody in the scientific community is actively trying to kill kids or anyone else for that matter. They are recommending these measures because they are experts in virology.

      1. SOQ

        I didn’t seek that out- it’s all over social media and he has yet to correct his mistake.

        I have concerns over ONE vaccine only- an experimental gene therapy with no long term safety data, which already has more injuries and deaths than all others in the past 15 years.

        I suggest you have a look at the indemnity demands made by Pfizer of Argentina and Brazil then ask why that is.

Comments are closed.

Broadsheet.ie