This morning

Meanwhile…

…via RTÉ News:

Minister for Education Norma Foley will meet public health officials, teachers’ unions and school management to discuss the reopening of schools.

Government ministers have said they expect schools to reopen as planned on Thursday.

However, the Association of Secondary Teachers, Ireland has called for a delayed and staggered reopening of schools, saying it would be an “unacceptable risk” for schools to reopen, without additional Covid-19 safety measures being put in place.

ASTI says union committed to reopening schools in ‘coherent, sensible fashion’ (RTE)

BBC

Meanwhile…

Meanwhile…

Sponsored Link

92 thoughts on “Young Portal

  1. hmmm

    Unapproved, untested gene altering concoction with an illegal Emergency Use Order to be forced on children.

    What could go wrong…?

    1. Mr.T

      4 out of 5 doctors recommend Thalidomide for pregnant women.

      Thalidomide – say goodbye to pregnancy sickness

  2. Parent

    The majority of the  covid related deaths (~5600 confirmed over 2 years) in Ireland with covid have occured in nursing homes and vast majority of deaths are over the age of 85+.    Only 8.4% of all with-covid  deaths in Ireland (all variants) have NOT had underlying conditions (only 494 / 5600 did NOT have comorbidities)

    So, I have 2 simple questions as a parent of 5 – 11 aged kids:    How many of the 5600 deaths in Ireland were kids age 5 to 11,  WITHOUT a comorbidity?  Is the answer non zero?  This data is unavailable. 

    How many of the ICU cases were kids WITHOUT underlying conditions? This data is also not available.

    Given that omicron is now even milder still, what is the actual motivation for vaccinating any child that does not have an underlying condition?

    1. Mise

      I’ve looked for this information also. Can not find it available, it’s all getting very scary for our children.

      1. SOQ

        Indeed – and not one single journalist asking what is the scientific rationale behind risking children’s health in such a manner.

          1. GiggidyGoo

            If the data isn’t available, then your statement shows how thick you can be. Unless you have the data (if so, then provide it).

          2. Nigel

            So far the data shows that the worse things that happen is a sore arm, tiredness and a tiny incidence of a heart thing that in an even tinier percentage leads to hospitalisaion and recovery. Not much of a risk in the contxt of a global pandemic that has killed millions.

          3. Nigel

            ‘Would it be Zero?’

            Small, but non-zero, particularly if they’re immunocompromised or have underlying conditions.

          4. hmmm

            No child under 18 has died of the COOF.

            You’re shrilling again.

            Where’s those Excess Mortality Numbers?

            NO risk from the COOF for children but just in case you should expose you child to “a tiny incidence of a heart thing ”

            Really?

          5. Renald

            The original Pfizer trial that allowed the rollouts has serious flaws and I think is outright shocking, but it must be faced, problem is how many parents well ever get to know these facts?

            There seems to be no justifiable medical reason for this rollout to children.

            For Refer you to, Pages 24, 25, 26, the following very well presented pdf. , the pdf raises numerous points on flawed trial.

            https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf

            For video version, again excellent presentation.

            https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html

            Nigel invite you to review this and then claim no risk? You cannot stand over this in good faith.

          6. Nigel

            ‘Nigel invite you to review this and then claim no risk?’

            I didn’t say there was no risk. But so far none of the fearmongering of the anti-vaxxers has come to pass and their claims about massive numbers of deaths and injuries turn out to be lies.

          7. Renald

            You see the report of what happened to the trial participant Maddie de Garay.

            It’s hard to argue what level of risk there is to this cohort though, as there are no data from trial? plus other serious flaws.

            So you have no idea of what risks are involved here, balanced with this cohort having little risk from Covid, is starts looking a little rushed no?

          8. Nigel

            It’s hard to argue when people keep wildly exaggerating the risks while downplaying the pandemic, going so far as to call it completely fake, yes.

          9. Renald

            Yes, there are some people calling it fake, but what matter?

            You’d just have to argue how you can claim the level of risk posed to this cohort is justified, but look the answer is you couldn’t as the risk is currently unknown.

            I didn’t get any hint exaggeration in the analysis linked personally.

            A lot of concerned parents.

            I suppose we’ll find out if enough parents do it.

          10. K. Cavan

            What’s “not that much of a risk”, Nigel?
            Given that children are virtually Covid-proof & that reducing risk from zero is impossible, even a minuscule risk is unacceptable to any sane individual when there is nothing to gain.
            The drunkest punter, making their way to the bookies from the pub would reject this bet.
            If one single child is even slightly injured by these experimental injections, this will be an absolute disaster & those supporting it should pay dearly for their cold, sociopathic contempt for the lives & health of our children. Allowing the politicians who’ve pushed this to retire with their pensions intact is not an option, oh no, not this time Mr Varadker & Mr Martin.

          11. hmmm

            Nigel gives up the CDC as a reference – a private foundation that profits from the sale of vaccines.

            Meanwhile, in Ireland, the HSE records no child deaths from the COOF.

            Where’s the Excess All Cause Mortality figures Nigel?

            Why are you hiding those numbers?

          12. GiggidyGoo

            @Nigel
            “ So far the data shows that the worse things that happen is a sore arm, tiredness and a tiny incidence of a heart thing that in an even tinier percentage leads to hospitalisaion and recovery. ”
            What data? If there is data, then produce it.

          13. Don Leary-Dort (formerly Tara Strete, formerly Sydney Parade-Gates, formerly Herr Coach, formerly Buzz Eireann, formerly Hughie Luas)

            What happens if your only symptom is a mild coof? (works best with Scottish accent).

          14. Nigel

            RENALD: ‘Yes, there are some people calling it fake, but what matter?’

            I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but there’s a lot of lies and misinformation around, and people claiing their layperson’s opinions are gospel, and demand other people’s layperson’s opinions in response.

            ‘I suppose we’ll find out if enough parents do it.’

            We’ll also find out about the long term effects of covid on all age groups. Pandemics are rough.

            K. CAVAN: ‘reducing risk from zero is impossible, even a minuscule risk is unacceptable’

            You’re talking about covid here, right?

            HMMM: ‘Why are you hiding those numbers?’

            I am quite the powerful figure in your fantasy life. Which is weird.

            GIGGY: ‘What data? If there is data, then produce it.’

            I’m hiding it, apparently. You’ll never find it, ever.

        1. Renald

          Especially as there is some evidence of possible harm ( this should be the standard, first do no harm, wtf are people thinking ) or that the inoculations even do anything, unreal..

          There seems to be no justifiable medical reason for this rollout to children.

          For Refer you to, Pages 24, 25, 26, the following very well presented pdf.

          https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf

          For video version, again excellent presentation.

          https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html

      1. Frank

        But the vaccine does not prevent transmission Reasonable Commenter. So how will vaccinating children who don’t need it stop the potential spread of this life affecting disease??

        1. Reasonable Commenter

          I believe it mitigates the viral load when people do transmit it Frank, I don’t believe your information there is entirely correct but you are free to provide empirical evidence to support your contention so we can evaluate it.

          1. Reasonable Commenter

            Maybe you can let Frank answer for himself, as that would be more polite Renald, didn’t your mother tell you it’s rude to interrupt other people while they are talking?

          2. Reasonable Commenter

            What does ‘not fully vaccinated’ mean in the context of that report Declan?
            The conversation was about the spread of the disease from children who are not vaccinated at all.

          3. scottser

            who gives a monkeys whether you get covid from a vaccinated or unvaccinated person? if you’ve had your shots, grand, you’re as safe as you’re ever going to be.

          4. Reasonable Commenter

            I’m not sure who your comment is directed at there Scottser.
            Intuitively if a person is vaccinated they are less likely to develop full blown or long COVID and thus would have a lower viral load themselves to potentially transmit on.

          5. Frank

            Reasonable Commenter we are now experiencing 20,000+ cases a day after a huge vaccine uptake 90%+
            So that tells me 2 things:
            1. The vaccine is not as effective as promised.
            2. The vaccine does not stop transmission.
            Lowering ” the viral load” (by what degree you have not said) still means a vaccinated child will still transmit the virus.
            The question then is: If you are in that group that experiences the severe or lethal result of Covid. Will this “reduced viral load” (by what % we are not sure??) still prove severe or lethal or will it be reduced to the mild cold the majority experience?

          6. Reasonable Commenter

            Thank you Frank I am glad we now both accept that vaccinating the unvaccinated, who these days are mostly the children, can help reduce the potential further spread of a life affecting disease. You seem to want to continue the discussion into percentages and questions of degree, and that shows you are on a personal search to truth and accuracy in what you say. I particularly note your concern for those who might still acquire a high viral load which has an adverse health impact for the person affected. Those are reasonable and valid questions Frank

          1. Nigel

            ‘anymore’

            You have never at any stage of this pandemic acknowledged any communitarian rationales for any pandemic mitigation efforts. You have always been in favour of letting it run through the population unchecked.

          2. SOQ

            You have nothing to offer but cliché BS and personal attacks- it wouldn’t surprise me if your entire caricature is fake- take a hike.

          1. Frank

            Nigel it was Reasonable Commenter that said “It’s to prevent the further potential spread of a life-affecting disease” so I assume you are altering that to read “It’s to REDUCE the further potential spread of a life-affecting disease”.
            But the vaccine has neither prevented nor reduced transmission of the virus. We are currently experiencing 20,000 case a day. So why vaccinate a child who recieves no benefit?

          2. Nigel

            ‘But the vaccine has neither prevented nor reduced transmission of the virus.’

            Given that we’re now into our second breakout variant, the degree to which the vaccines are reducing spread is hard to determine, unless you use unvaccinated as a control group, and if indications are it spreads easier amongst that cohort, then yes, the vaccines are reducing spread, and they are also reducing severity and mortality – against a variant they were not (and could not have been) initially targeted at.

          3. Frank

            “Given that we’re now into our second breakout variant, the degree to which the vaccines are reducing spread is hard to determine”
            That makes no sense Nigel. We are at 20,000+ cases a day. So the vaccine is not stopping the spread of the virus.

          4. Nigel

            Of course it makes sense, since in order to judge it, we’d have to know how much it would be spreading without the vaccine, so then the question is, how is it spreading amongst the unvaccinated. And of course ‘spread’ isn’t the only way of judging the effectiveness of the vaccines, there’s also severity of infection, and mortality.

  3. No more Maura

    This is terrifying on so many levels and that the British heat foundation are trying to normalise heart attacks in children just before the big push for child vaccinations is crazy. How many of our children will have to die before the real reporting we see here every day has a chance of making it on to the six one news?

    1. Nigel

      Health agencies have been trying to raise awareness of young people collapsing from heart-related reasons for decades. I’m old enough to remember periodic discussion on the radio about young people dying in the middle of training or matches as far back as the eighties.

      1. No more Maura

        Yes but now they are doing it to try and normalise the killing of children through ‘vaccines’.

        1. Nigel

          No, they’re not. Why would national health services, however flawed, filled with individuals devoted to saving lives and protecting people’s health, suddenly turn into homicidal sociopathic monsters en masse?

          1. No more Maura

            I don’t know that’s why I come here, in hope for answers. Why are they trying to kill all the children with ‘vaccines’?

          2. E'Matty

            Because population control is a pillar of modern global health. Pruning the tree of life and all that. How much evil must you do to do good? They’re quite literally psychopathic.

          3. Nigel

            Yeah, everyone who works to save and improve lives in national health services and medical research institutions, doctors, nurses, scientists, all suddenly agreed to cull a portion of the entire human race, just because.

          4. f_lawless

            I think evolutionary theorist, Mark Changizi, makes a valid point here about how mass delusion/ mass psychosis/etc manifests itself.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7lzn0QV2ZE
            “People come to believe what they believe by virtue of the network of those around them and listening to each of these things according to the reputations of those who have them. That’s basically how we come to our beliefs. They’re no different than you.

            A mass delusion is an emergent phenomenon..

            .It’s not about individuals being crazy. It’s crazy at the network level not the individual level”

            The doctors and nurses administering to perfectly healthy children the experimental vaccine – with flawed clinical trials and huge numbers of adverse reactions already logged in reporting systems, etc, etc – aren’t doing so because they’ve gone psychotic on an individual level. It’s because they as individuals take their cue from the network around them which has gone off the rails.

          5. Reasonable Commenter

            flawed clinical trials and huge numbers of adverse reactions already logged in reporting systems

            I am sure you have detailed records and logs to illustrate this point f_lawless?

          6. f_lawless

            (original comment disappeared, I’ll try separating in two)
            @RC

            This article by ex-NYT journalist, Alex Berenson, is a good starting point:
            https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical
            (article includes a link to the data in question)

            https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical

            More people died in the key clinical trial for Pfizer’s Covid vaccine than the company publicly reported

            Pfizer told the world 15 people who received the vaccine in its trial had died as of mid-March. Turns out the real number then was 21, compared to only 17 deaths in people who hadn’t been vaccinated…

            …Pfizer somehow miscounted – or publicly misreported, or both – the number of deaths in one of the most important clinical trials in the history of medicine…

            ..Were the extra deaths cardiac-related? It is impossible to know. The FDA did not report any additional details of the deaths, saying only that none “were considered related to vaccination.”

            But with tens of thousands of post-vaccine deaths now reported in the United States and Europe – and overall non-Covid death rates now running well above normal in many countries – a fresh look at that vague reassurance cannot happen soon enough.

            ..Worse, Pfizer and BioNTech had vaccinated almost all the placebo recipients in the trial shortly after the Food and Drug Administration okayed the vaccine for emergency use on Dec. 11, 2020.

            As a result, they had destroyed our best chance to compare the long-term health of a large number of vaccine recipients with a scientifically balanced group of people who had not received the drug”

          7. f_lawless

            Question for admins – if they see this:

            I’ve attempted to reply to Reasonable Commenter’s request for a link to more information on the flawed nature of the clinical trials but my comments don’t appear. Any sign of the comment in the in a pending inbox, I wonder?

          8. Nigel

            ‘It’s because they as individuals take their cue from the network around them which has gone off the rails.’

            What would medical people know about administering medicine? They are deliuded, crazy, and reduced to robotic obedience. Of course.

          9. f_lawless

            @Nigel

            Here’s a scenario you should consider:

            – European Medicines Agency becomes captured by the industry its supposed to regulate (has happened before leading to the head of the EMA ‘s resignation amid a corruption scandal). EMA approves a new unsafe drug for children due to this regulatory capture.
            – HSE, which incidentally receives millions in donations from pharmaceutical companies each year, rubberstamps the licence for the new drug in Ireland. “If it’s good enough for the EMA, it’s good enough for us”.
            – Local GP prescribes the unsafe drug to children. Assures parents that drug has been fully approved by both the EMA and HSE.

        2. Renald

          @No more Maura
          “I don’t know that’s why I come here, in hope for answers. Why are they trying to kill all the children with ‘vaccines’?

          I have no doubt children will die for these inoculations, or whatever you want to call them, based reading through much evidence that some concerned players are trying to get out.

          Say we forget about whether there is any other contingencies feeding into the mass vaccination program currently being rolled out. Of which I reckon there are plenty!

          And then say a decision gets made to vaccinate the population, other therapeutic inventions get sidelined, an ‘all eggs in one basket’ strategy.

          Once this strategy becomes politicised then its very difficult to reverse the policy. If the evidence of the efficacy of vaccines is somewhat murky initially ( legit or nefarious ), then its just a matter of expediency for the players involved.

          Statistical reporting can be fudged all the time! to play down any negative feedback.

          This would be extremely callous of course and perhaps a frightening answer but could explain the push to continue through the different age groups.

          So why aren’t more medical staff etc speaking up ? Well they are starting too but in US for example there is a ex-ordinary amount of political pressure being brought to bare, this can result in termination of employment.

          I’m not saying this is what’s occurring to you and you must believe it, I think its part of it, but you have to start somewhere to tease this thing out I guess. What the rationale for jabbing young children? You’ll get the same answers over and over but until these get picked apart it’ll difficult to convince, hopefully this will happen.

          Good luck to you :)

          1. SOQ

            @ Renald

            I don’t agree with your point about other inventions being side-lined once vaccines appeared. It is pretty obvious that, especially in the US, there has been a concerted campaign to block early intervention protocols from long before CoVid-19 vaccines were released.

            The idea that an experiential gene therapy with what we know is at best, short term efficacy, with no medium or long term safety data, is preferable to a Nobel prize winning SAFE drug which is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines, is ridiculous.

            Some people get unsettled when I compare to the HIV/AIDS scandal but treatments were with held back then in exactly the same way and…. people died.

            Deep down we should all know what is going on- and yes, history is repeating itself.

          2. Nigel

            ‘there has been a concerted campaign to block early intervention protocols’

            You mean a politically-driven quasi-evangelical hysteria about some drugs that were not really effective against covid did not lead to them being prescribed for covid? Sinister!

          3. Renald

            @SOQ

            “I don’t agree with your point ……..”

            Yes I don’t doubt this has happened previously, its the same animal, , if it can be shown were this occurred historically, this would obviously add context to how it occurred this time. I’m just not familiar with those

            I was just trying to give a plausible scenario to Maura as she seemed at a loss to understand why something like this ( experimental drug getting given to children under coercive conditions ) could happen.

            In this context the mRNA experimental inoculations needed EUA status, this required no officially sanctioned alternative treatments to be available, so suppress ( or don’t explore at least ) other therapeutics by whatever means, EUA status gets approved.

            I’m wouldn’t be surprised if this model was used before to favour a new drug license

            “The idea that an experiential gene therapy………..”

            Yes, that was my point that it was the way to clear the path for the EUA, like if the stakeholders ( for mRNA / vector gene therapies ), knew that other interventions could work and that to get EUA they couldn’t have the happen, then that throws light on why ivermectin etc were denigrated it this current context.

            “Deep down we should all know…..”

            Unfortunately its clear many don’t want to know, are incredulous , stand to benefit, what have you.

      2. f_lawless

        @Nigel

        Here’s a scenario you should consider:

        – European Medicines Agency becomes captured by the industry its supposed to regulate (has happened before leading to the head of the EMA ‘s resignation amid a corruption scandal). EMA approves a new unsafe drug for children due to this regulatory capture.
        – HSE, which incidentally receives millions in donations from pharmaceutical companies each year, rubberstamps the licence for the new drug in Ireland. “If it’s good enough for the EMA, it’s good enough for us”.
        – Local GP prescribes the unsafe drug to children. Assures parents that drug has been fully approved by both the EMA and HSE.

  4. just millie

    Can someone explain what exactly Bodger is trying to suggest by stringing together the three(?) stories above?

    Aside from the obvious vaccine/bad narrative we all enjoyed so much of last year.

    1. Bodger

      They all involve young people and the rona. The British Heart Foundation PSA is getting ahead of when children begin collapsing on pitches like the adults are.

      1. No more Maura

        Exactly! Has anyone started an investigation into this yet? It is crazy what they are doing and carzyer that people cant see why they are doing it? I searched The British Heart Foundation, they have 4000 staff, surely at least one of them must be willing to sacrifice their job to show what is really going on??

    2. No more Maura

      Someone has to think of the children, Bodger is one of the few lwft out there willing to speak out.

          1. Nigel

            No, mock young teenage activists trying to save their future some more while hypocritically using children to emotively fearmonger the loathesome and unsupported conspiracy theories you refuse to even properly articulate.

          2. Nigel

            Odd that you didn’t do a story on the results of that Texas audit of the presidential election. Are the whte hat hackers that observed the fraud in real time ever going to release the proof?

  5. E'Matty

    Posted before but a reminder for all parents now that it’s been confirmed children will receive Pfizer. Even Pfizer admit they do not know what the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis is for this age group.

    Pfizer – [COMIRNATY (COVID-19 VACCINE, MRNA)] VACCINES AND RELATED BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE BRIEFING DOCUMENT
    Meeting Date: 26 October 2021

    https://www.fda.gov/media/153409/download

    Pfizer/BioNTech are seeking EUA of a 10-µg dose level of BNT162b2 for use in individuals
    5 to <12 years of age as a two-dose primary series given 3 weeks apart.

    P11
    Overall Risk-Benefit Conclusions

    "The number of participants in the current clinical development program is too small to detect any potential risks of myocarditis associated with vaccination. Long-term safety of COVID-19 vaccine in participants 5 to <12 years of age will be studied in 5 POST-AUTHORIZATION safety studies, including a 5-year follow-up study to evaluate long term sequelae of post-vaccination myocarditis/pericarditis."

    So, POST authorisation studies and we'll know in 5 years time how much damage these vaccines cause to kids. Just remember, to date, the risk of myocarditis has increased as the recipient age decreases.

    Anyone injecting these vaccines, which do not prevent transmission, into their healthy child is quite frankly beyond redemption and is inviting tragedy into their lives.

    1. Renald

      And that’s after the flawed / under-powered / rushed trial that allowed the EUA in the first place.

      There seems to be no justifiable medical reason for this rollout to children.

      For Refer you to, Pages 24, 25, 26, the following very well presented pdf.

      https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf

      For video version, again excellent presentation.

      https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html

      I’ll leave it at that, anyone who sees pass on.

    2. Nigel

      Why are you whining about risk of myocarditis and pericarditis? You literally think the vaccine is being used to mass murder people. Quibbling about the risk level of myocarditis and pericarditis seems relatively trivial, unless you’re not as convinced of the mass murder plot as you claim.

      1. GiggidyGoo

        “ You literally think the vaccine is being used to mass murder people”
        Scraping the bottom of the barrel now Nigel. Have a break.

      2. Renald

        Some forms of myocarditis can result in death, sometimes years later.

        Remember seeing something like 20% of cases will lead to major complications ( including mortality ). This can easily be checked so might be different figure.

        There are claims that myocarditis resulting from these novel inoculations isn’t the type ( to cause such issues ) but this is disputed, so there’s that.

        Not to mention other unknown risks.

    1. Don Leary-Dort (formerly Tara Strete, formerly Sydney Parade-Gates, formerly Herr Coach, formerly Buzz Eireann, formerly Hughie Luas)

      The writing is on the pavement wall.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link
Broadsheet.ie