True vaccinated ICU rate much higher than official statistics.
People like it simple, big numbers, short headlines etc. Imagine where would this nation be if we weren't so intelectualy lazy.
What about looking at the "home" and "unknown" deaths too?
Intensive care consultant and anaesthetist here from UK. Something that is worth thinking about is the very aggressive "not for ICU" and "not for CPR" policies that certainly my NHS trust has been running since the start of the pandemic. Nearly every patient over 70 is denied access to critical care beds, very unfairly in my opinion. This means that critical care beds are reserved for younger patients who in general come from a lower vaccinated population. I am not suggesting that the tax adds much to protection - I don't think it does, however older and generally vaxxed, patients are not admitted and hence the stats are skewed. I hope this makes sense
Of course, another important reason that the elderly are not admitted to ICU is for ethical reasons.
There is a cost benefit analysis to be made.
The certainty of extreme discomfort and distress of being intubated, for example, versus the liklihood of a successful outcome.
Often the decision is made not to admit on this basis.
Thanks for this. Very helpful to have some independent critical analysis to read on the Irish situation. The old media have long since died a death.
This is awesome! But to persuade our loved ones who are sleepwalking into a deeper nightmare it would really really help all of us reading your work to know the relevant links / references / sources so that we can point these facts out.
Thank you for shining a light on such deliberately murky information - you're a guiding light during these times!
Well put together. As the below from the Court of Justice of the European Union shows, I have commenced proceedings in T-586/21 'Swords v Commission' over the total refusal to provide the information supporting the alleged public health benefit for travel restrictions on EU Citizens, including mandatory hotel quarantine.
Furthermore, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) is the agency of the EU Commission tasked with producing the legal risk assessments to justify control measures, etc. If you care to read their risk assessment of the 2 Dec on the Omicron variant, you will see it is nothing of the sort, rather scare mongering. A subsequent legal request for information on their methodologies used was responded with a Rapid Risk Assessment tool published in 2019, which in fairness is good. However, the document of 2 Dec failed to follow all 5 stages of this tool and if it did the subsequent risk would have been assessed as 'Low Risk' and not 'High to Very High' risk.
It is also noteworthy in relation to the draconian recommendations of the ECDC 'risk assessment' of the 2 Dec , including increasing the surveillance of EU citizens rather than spending time and resources on treating the sick, that it parroted those established in an EU Commission policy document, COM(2021) 764 final, which was published the previous day and only three working days after this variant was discovered by the WHO. Horse, cart, etc. At the moment further legal avenues are being investigated in addition to case T-586/21. Contact me if you want to get access to my detailed analysis of the situation above.
Very well put together,,keep up the good work,,we need more people like what you,,,or yours doing,,very well done it's time like this that I wished I'd went to school more often 🤣I'm lucky to be able to write my name,,but have one more thing to say,,some of my old school very intelligent gobshits are tick as fock, I'm laughing at them now not d other way around as it was many times,,if ya got this far reading thank you if you think I'm d intelligent one an if ya think I'm not it's ok I forgive ya,,,🇮🇪😎
Now this is the type of Sherlock Holmes investigative data crunching we need! Bravo!
The next question is are there any brave reporters lurking here and willing to confront NPHET and the government?