NI Public Health Consultation Bill - Jul 2024

[Rossfan]

Much small pox or polio around these days?

[theskull1]

Yeah, it is down to you to at least list some potential scenarios as you are the one who is making the wild assertions.

It comes down to plausibility.

Do you really believe the government, already up to it's ears with health service problems before the pandemic, but now with massive shortages of nurses and PPE and severely overburdened active staff, is going to be able to roll out a program to track who is not taking the vaccine and then mobilize enough cops and soldiers to round up all of these thousands of people, bring them to some kind of temporary detention center, strap each of them down, inject the vaccine, and then hold them all so that the second dose can be administered a couple of weeks later? And then just release them all without any legal or popular repurcussion?

Its going to do all of this rather than rely on the carrot/stick approach of restrictions/permissions that they did in fact use?

Yeah, you definitely need to back up what you're claiming.

Just answer the question ffs 

Its not me who wrote this policy. Both you and I can assume they want the powers to do what they would like to do and have a plan on how they might implement those powers. Given this, might I have been forced against my will to get the COVID vaccine given I was deemed a risk against public health at that time?

[J70]

Yeah, it is down to you to at least list some potential scenarios as you are the one who is making the wild assertions.

It comes down to plausibility.

Do you really believe the government, already up to it's ears with health service problems before the pandemic, but now with massive shortages of nurses and PPE and severely overburdened active staff, is going to be able to roll out a program to track who is not taking the vaccine and then mobilize enough cops and soldiers to round up all of these thousands of people, bring them to some kind of temporary detention center, strap each of them down, inject the vaccine, and then hold them all so that the second dose can be administered a couple of weeks later? And then just release them all without any legal or popular repurcussion?

Its going to do all of this rather than rely on the carrot/stick approach of restrictions/permissions that they did in fact use?

Yeah, you definitely need to back up what you're claiming.

Just answer the question ffs 

Its not me who wrote this policy. Both you and I can assume they want the powers to do what they would like to do and have a plan on how they might implement those powers. Given this, might I have been forced against my will to get the COVID vaccine given I was deemed a risk against public health at that time?

I answered it already.

NO!

I then outlined the logic behind my answer. If you want to ignore that, knock yourself out.

[J70]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

[trileacman]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

A spurious argument as rabies cannot be spread between humans.

[trileacman]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

Are you arguing for vaccination to become mandatory and administered without consent? Because that seems to be the crux of your post.

[theskull1]

So I go to A&E for an X Ray when Covid, according to the authorities, was endemic and anyone unvaccinated was deemed a risk to public health. This would have given them the authority to vaccinate me against my will.

We got there in the end

[J70]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

A spurious argument as rabies cannot be spread between humans.

1. That is not proven. It's simply not documented. They're hardly going to run tests now, are they?
2. Pathogens evolve, jump the species barrier etc. They're not infinitely static.
3. You ignored the rest of the point.

[J70]

So I go to A&E for an X Ray when Covid, according to the authorities, was endemic and anyone unvaccinated was deemed a risk to public health. This would have given them the authority to vaccinate me against my will.

We got there in the end

You would have been sent home to isolate and recover, like anyone who wasn't very ill was. You know, like in real life?

Rabies is 100% fatal.

[J70]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

Are you arguing for vaccination to become mandatory and administered without consent? Because that seems to be the crux of your post.

In extreme cases, sure.

And legislation has to plan for such an eventuality.

[Milltown Row2]

Jehovah Witnesses do not take blood transfusions, they'd rather their kid would die than allow them to have 'someone else's' blood.

Some anti vaccination people are in the same boat as above

[trileacman]

As for having the authorities having the right to, in certain situations, impose a vaccine treatment on someone, one doesn't have to strain oneself to imagine a scenario where that might be needed.

Let's say we have an area where rabies is endemic (and yes, it is not endemic in Ireland, for now). A child gets bitten by a stray dog, which disappears before anyone can properly contain/neutralize it or even identify it. Parents take child to the A&E to get the wound treated, but they don't "believe" in vaccines, so they refuse to allow the medical staff to start the rabies vaccine course, even though there is a real chance the dog in question was rabid. Should the medical staff have the authority to hold the child and administer the vaccine, or should the parents be free to take the child home and possibly condemn it to death? Or let's say it's an adult with a family who is bitten - what about the other people, including kids, in the house who, theoretically, could also be exposed should the person develop rabies due to refusal of the vaccine course?

A spurious argument as rabies cannot be spread between humans.

1. That is not proven. It's simply not documented. They're hardly going to run tests now, are they?

Rabies infected people do not pose a threat to other people. Anyone who believes they do and must be immediately vaccinated is an idiot.

[David McKeown]

On the original point.  This consultation is actually part 2 of the consultation that began 9 years ago.  It is most definitely not flying under the radar with at least two Judicial Reviews lodged in respect of the legality of it and two recent health committee meetings about it on the hill with all members effectively asking for it to be rethought out and re done.

The rest of the stuff in this thread seems to have descended into ill informed farce. 

[David McKeown]

Obesity: Self inflected
autism: no single cause but yes there is a train of thought that exposure to pesticides can be one reason, age of parents when giving birth and genetic factors can come into play
adhd: Well parents can mainly take the blame for this one, what they consumed before and while pregnant
asthma: can be past down if parents have it, and people had asthma long before vaccines
diabetes: Generally self inflected
cardiovascular disease: can be mainly self inflected
dementia: mainly age related but certainly like all f these lifestyle choices don't help
Alzheimer's: mainly age related but certainly like all f these lifestyle choices don't help
Strokes: very preventable but some family history of it and Ethnicity can be a reason. but mainly poor life style choices, though her mum had one,  great lifestyle, healthy, so other than stress which she has, it was the main reason I feel for hers
Arthritis: can be just down to old age, self inflected through sports, injuries, wear and tear because of weight

There are plenty of other illnesses that can be prevented or certainly reduced, but having worked in a surgery for many years and seeing the types of people coming in, it would take some sea of change to reverse all of that and I think the horse has bolted, and if you have any sense start looking after yourself now.

On a good note I had a hearty farmer in with me earlier today, 76 years old still manning the farm from 5 in the morning till 6 at night, no medication, not much weight on him, couple of beers with dinner, glass of wine and bed! repeat 7 days a week lol!

As for the doctors, I wouldn't stick them on the gestopo list just yet, the system doesn't allow them to care after patients the way it was intended, its the system that's fucked, not the doctors

As a matter of interest where do you practice medicine and/or have you first hand experience of these conditions because your theories certainly dont accord with the medical advice I have received or my own experiences

[Look-Up!]

So I go to A&E for an X Ray when Covid, according to the authorities, was endemic and anyone unvaccinated was deemed a risk to public health. This would have given them the authority to vaccinate me against my will.

We got there in the end

You would have been sent home to isolate and recover, like anyone who wasn't very ill was. You know, like in real life?

Rabies is 100% fatal.

Bad example as there is no treatment or vaccine for rabies once bitten. At least that was the case when I looked to get vaccinated. You need 2 jabs I think about 6 weeks apart. If you don't have both of these, don't get bitten.

But I get the point you're making plus I get the counter point. I don't like the idea of introducing laws to jab people up against their will. If there is some catastrophic outbreak then emergency legislation will over ride all existing law anyway. Common sense approach.