We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE INFECTIOUS DISEASE hepatitis C has been all but eradicated in people suffering from the blood condition haemophilia – who were infected when they were given contaminated blood.
The announcement today that upwards of 90% of the 220 people who were infected with the disease – which was passed them when they were given contaminated blood transfusions during the 1970s and 80s – was welcomed by the Irish Haemophilia Society.
Haemophilia is a genetic condition in which a person’s blood doesnt clot properly, meaning they could bleed much more profusely from cuts.
Throughout the 1970s and 80s, patients with haemophilia were given blood products which contained the hepatitis C virus, which was only formally identified in 1989.
In total, 266 people were infected with the disease through blood or blood products. Many have died since as a result of the infection, and the State has paid out large sums of money to survivors.
There have been a number of treatment programmes offered to survivors in the intervening years.
Today, Health Minister Simon Harris said he was “delighted” to announce that the HSE National Hepatitis C Treatment Programme had had a very high success rate for haemophilia patients.
“I am so delighted for all the patients who can now look forward to a bright, healthy future,” said Harris.
The effective eradication of this disease will transform the lives of these patients, their families and those who continue to access the new direct acting anti-viral medicines under the Programme.
Commenting on the news, Brian O’Mahony, chief executive of the Irish Haemophilia Society, said that the news meant that the disease was “effectively eradicated” in the haemophilia population.
He said that anyone who wanted treatment for hepatitis C was given it, and “has now been cleared” of the disease.
There is no cure for haemophilia, however with proper treatment and self-care most people with the condition can live healthy, active lives.
This headline is inappropriate and sensationalist. It does nothing to advocate the amazing work Tom has been doing in promoting the role of the White Ribbon Campaign, and the calm and dignified way in which he has been doing it.
The murderer should have been castrated after his first rape conviction, but no that would make too much sense, and there is too much money to be made by the circus courts on this type of cash cow.
I listened to the interview and this headline is not at all a representation of the true tone of Mr. Meaghar’s interview. It makes him sound like someone who is obsessed with hatred and thoughts of revenge. Truer is the representation that Sean O’Rourke outlined, where he has turned his energies to forming a collective of men who will impress, through their unity, a united voice opposed to violence against women that will influence all men. This is his legacy to Jill, as Sean O’Rourke pointed out, not obsession and hatred as the headline suggests. Very tabloid…
Hi John,
Thanks for your feedback. Just a little explanation on headline choice as I agree that the tone of the interview was how Tom’s work came out of the horrific events.
If you read the subtitle and the first line of the article, that is how I have framed the story – that a huge positive came from the initial obsession. Headlines are not meant to tell the whole story.
Thanks
Sinéad
“If you read the subtitle and the first line of the article, that is how I have framed the story – that a huge positive came from the initial obsession. Headlines are not meant to tell the whole story”
The font size of the subheading is even smaller than the actual content. Headlines are meant to st the tone for a story.
A very feeble excuse, Sinead.
Why wasn’t Tom’s positivity expressed in the headline and the initial obsession in the subtitle?
Surely that would best reflect how you claim you wanted to frame the story?
“Headlines are not meant to tell the whole story.” Why was the title of a recent Ask.fm/IDA article changed? Honest question.
I agree with Sinead. Nor did I take the negative perspective from either the headline or the story that some have. Indeed, I think it highly important that people know that despite the work this wonderful man has undertaken since the death of his wife he is still so deeply affected by this horrendous crime. His detestation and hatred of the rapist murderer does not detract in any way from his wonderful compassionate work. In fact it makes him more human. He is incredibly open and honest about his feelings and I admire him all the more. I do not find this feelings towards the rapist in any way detract from his contribution on other fronts. He is clearly a deep and compassionate man and I can relate to both his anger and rage at the rapist and to his compassion. His is a very human story and we are better for knowing the full of it. A great guy.
“His detestation and hatred of the rapist murderer does not detract in any way from his wonderful compassionate work.”
No, but the headline does.
@JohnR
The whole point of people’s disgust is based on their great admiration of how Tom has been coping with horrendous adversity.
They feel strongly – as I do – that he deserves better than a tabloid style headline to introduce his noble story.
The least Sinead could do is to apologise and admit that she made a journalistic blunder.
Twink and Fraj, I appreciate what you’re saying. I just don’t feel the same way about the headline. I know the story of what happened. The headline did not in my view diminish his story nor did the article seek to minimise his wonderful contribution. I think people are over reacting. It’s a headline designed to draw people into his story. It appears to have succeeded. Just my view but I appreciate that others may see things very differently.
I would imagine the headline – “Jill Meagher’s husband has turned his anger and grief into positive action” would receive vastly less clicks then the current one. It is as simple as that.
Here is the same story portrayed in a more honest and less sensationalistic [i.e. click generating] fashion.
The headline is nasty and misleading and only relates to one quote as to where the poor man’s head was at even while he aimed to help, so it is, at most, a reference point, not the central thread which should surely be reflected in headline.
The headline has set a wrong tone for the actual article. I wonder how many people skipped your story be cause of this sinead
I didn’t intend causing a furore with my initial observation and certainly don’t think that any apology is necessary as Fraj suggested. I do, however agree with him when he says that Tom Meagher, ” deserves better than a tabloid-style headline to introduce his noble story”.
As a famous Corkonian once said, several times, ” We’ll leave it there now so…ok?”
You cannot heal until you forgive.i know that’s very difficult.
have your say