Coronavirus - Here come the variants

I get why you posted it, it makes sense.

Re Manaus is it an outlier though? Lombardy did seem to be 12 months ago at the outset. What do the Guardian or your good self know about the life expectancy there, the population in regards to age etc,

Even stepping away from that, thanks for admitting it re children under 16.

Look, I have plenty of young family and plenty of friends with a young family. I am also, in the natural rural way of things, on friendly terms with a lot of young lads through the hurling club. Lads I had at U14 are now early to mid twenties. I have never said anything negative or caustic about young people here. I think they have been dreadfully served by the government – and ripped off by universities. My sympathy js largely with them.

1 Like

I haven’t a clue mate, again that doesn’t tally with my experience, obviously I wouldn’t be in conversation with twenty somethings as often as my own generation.
I find people to be quite tolerant in the real world, like I said, most people are sensible in how they approach the restrictions and people respect that,
Most people seem to roll their eyes at the MHQ

1 Like

“Children under 16” is a bit of rhetoric, really. A 17 year old is also a child.

What way forward is there other than mass vaccination? Can you give me one?

I would imagine vaccinating 13 to 16 year olds, on basis of metabolism, would be more important than vaccinating 12 year olds down. But I am only a lay person trying to use common sense. I am no expert.

The country will need to deliver c. 4m vaccinations again next year.

Could that cost an ongoing 100 or 200 per dose and delivery? Will it be half a billion or a billion in total? Must the booster be of the same form as the initial doses? What is the recommended term, exactly 12 months? What happens when rev2 vaccine comes available?

All children under 16 is what I got from the Guardian piece you posted this afternoon mate. That came from Neil Ferguson.

I don’t want to go over old ground again as I’ve explained it before but longterm side effects for these vaccines are not known fullstop.

What is known is this virus has no effect on children, I’m not sure if its even proven that they can actually transmit it, “without symptoms”

People are walking into this with the attitude ah sure everything will be grand, lets vaccinate everyone every 6 months and it’l be grand. I don’t think so.

Credit to you again, at least you can see where this is going regarding everyones kids on this forum in terms of full mandatory vaccines. A lot of other posters are even too shy to say that.

Good to hear, but some people have a sense of power in effecting others. It’s probably a small minority, the type of people tonring the guards if they are not happy. I heard the garden section of woodies in Limerick was closed as someone complained about it being open and non essential. One person making a balls for everyone else. You’re right most people want to get on with living

The point is anyone, of whatever age, carrying the virus rather than the virus as a direct threat, at whatever age, to someone’s health. This basic issue is the pivot. To get back to normality, infection rates need to fall to a certain level. There are a limited amount of ways this drop can be achieved.

What you are arguing is irrational. How do you know getting Covid does not have long term effects for young people, of whatever age? You do not know. Yet you are against vaccination on still more nebulous grounds.

It’s important to remember that we’re up against a virus that has it’s own advertising budget, which requires a deeply flawed testing method to identify it and which claims victims with an average age above the average age of mortality. Somehow we’ve managed to square the concept that most people with it rather than of it without being outraged. We’ve also conditioned ourselves to be renew our fear on a weekly basis via the threat of new variants…which are so frightening we’ve forgotten last weeks variant, and the one before that.
We’re so terrified of the virus that we need to be hectored and brow beaten into taking an unavailable vaccine, which should be rolled out in time for it to be defunct and due to be replaced or boosted etc.

10 Likes

Simply not true.

[quote] Children & teens can get COVID-19.

While fewer children have been sick with COVID-19 compared to adults, children can be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19, can get sick from COVID-19, and can spread the virus that causes COVID-19 to others. Children, like adults, who have COVID-19 but have no symptoms (“asymptomatic”) can still spread the virus to others.

Most children with COVID-19 have mild symptoms or have no symptoms at all. However, some children can get severely ill from COVID-19. They might require hospitalization, intensive care, or a ventilator to help them breathe. In rare cases, they might die.

CDC and partners are investigating a rare but serious medical condition associated with COVID-19 in children called Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C). We do not yet know what causes MIS-C and who is at increased risk for developing it. Learn more about MIS-C.[/quote]

So why, then, has the world turned itself upside down for more than 12 months? Why were the solutions, if so simple, not deployed?

I am genuinely perplexed.

That science is one of the reasons why caution was – and is – required.

Right wing thought is dominated by the twin paradigms of impatience and a belief that only more willpower is required. Hence the furore in certain circles, such as on the Tory back benches.

1 Like

I don’t think it’s at all reasonable to expect a simple solution to a virus. But there were established agreed responses, generations of scientific research etc, all of which were obviously abandoned to a rising tide of hysteria

1 Like

I don’t think my point is irrational, what I would do in the morning if I had the power in government would be to open everything up, honestly.

Vulnerable people are shielding anyway and I’d let the virus run through young people whilst properly protecting the vulnerable.

The money going out on the PUP would surely really boost capacity in the health service. Build up ICU and general bed capacity. Lockdowns dont work, masks dont work and the vaccines probably won’t work either if they don’t provide immunity or fully stop transmission - manufacturers words, not mine.

This virus isnt the Spanish flu, generally people who pass from it have at least one if not two or three chronic underlying illnesses and are in their 80’s.

I know if was elderly, I wouldnt want childrens lives been destroyed for a virus that doesnt effect them.

The elderly are shielding anyway. Vaccinate them by all means - if it turns out the vaccines doesnt give them immunity, whats the point for the rest of the population??

But my question is different: why?

Is it really believable that decision makers allowed “hysteria” to cost trillions?

1 = not achievable in either ethical or logistical terms. A video game fantasy.

2 = people are not entitled to take on risk for other people, which is effectively what would transpire. You are entitled to play roulette with your health (or with your family’s health, perhaps). You are not entitled to play roulette with anyone else’s health.

3 = children both not being affected and not being carriers, as pointed out just now, is a myth. Inconvenient facts are still facts.

4 = the impact of infection rates on normal society is a far bigger issue than the elderly’s position. You cannot have normal society during a rolling de facto lockdown. I think France had 40,000 new cases on a recent day. If every person infected had five contacts, you have nearly quarter of a million people starting a 14 day lockdown. How is this scenario ‘normal society’?

Which one? Boris, donald, meehawl?

Historians are always on the lookout for instances where people acted against their own economic interest, since such instances are highly rare. So I am interested in why this whole scenario transpired, if solving it was relatively easy via established procedures.

Individual incompetence and chicanery is not an adequate explanation of what will be, many decades from now, one of the 21st century’s key events.

Solving it? That would be about as realistic as solving the weather

1 Like

1, that’s your opinion, I totally disagree. I would say 80% of people don’t even garner a sore throat from this virus if they are youngish and healthy. Debunks the logistics of your point completely.

2, what about the coersion then in relation to vaccine passports? Is that not an unneccessary risk for a healthy child to take who is at pretty much no risk of illness from Covid.

3, From what I can see regarding the impact on Covid for children, young people even middle aged adults who are relatively healthy who have tested positive, its been a minor thing, A good few people have said to me thay they’ve had worse hangovers.

4, I’d personally welcome massive case numbers if the vulnerable and elderly were both vaccinated and shielded properly. The 14 day theory etc etc did not happen in states in the US that have fully opened up.

1 Like