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.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FactCheck
FactCheck: Many of the claims made about Covid-19 in a leaflet sent to Dublin households are false or misleading
The leaflet was distributed in the name of Anti-Corruption Ireland, an anti-government group.
12.02am, 2 Oct 2020
87.3k
90
IN RECENT DAYS, a leaflet containing a number of false, misleading and nonsensical claims about Covid-19 has been dropped into households in Dublin.
The leaflet, which bears the logo and contact information for Anti-Corruption Ireland (ACI), a largely online anti-government group, claims that Covid-19 is a “staged event to usher in a police state and a globalist ‘one world’ government”, which has become a trope of conspiracy theorists during the pandemic.
It claims that the facts around coronavirus are wrong; warns that the pandemic is a step towards tyranny; and says that vaccines are dangerous.
Many of these claims go against public health advice and are targeted at vulnerable people who may be more susceptible to the messaging.
The leaflet was sent into us by a reader, asking for the claims to be verified. We have gone through the leaflet and factchecked the main claims made in it.
Let us know if you too have received this leaflet in your area, and share this piece on social media if you have.
Claim: The government is massaging the Covid-19 death rates to inflate them and frighten the public.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: 99.8% of patients recover from Covid-19.
Verdict: UNPROVEN
Claim: 80% of “test-positive” people experience no symptoms.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: Covid-19 is no more serious than the flu.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: The WHO admits the virus is not believed to spread through surfaces.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: The WHO admits the virus is not believed to spread through the air.
Verdict: Mostly FALSE
Claim: Staying indoors weakens physical and mental health.
Verdict: MISLEADING
Claim: Masks reduce oxygen intake.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: Masks are dangerous harbours for germs
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: Masks harm your immune system
Verdict: NONSENSE
Claim: The HPV vaccine has harmed hundreds of teenage girls in Ireland.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: The HPV vaccine can increase the risk of cancer by 44%.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: India cut ties with Bill Gates after doctors linked the polio vaccine to thousands of cases of childhood paralysis.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: Vaccines contain material from aborted babies which can alter the recipient’s DNA.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: More than 80 studies link vaccines to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: More than $4 billion has been paid out for vaccine injuries and death.
Verdict: MISLEADING
Claim: The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe.
Verdict: FALSE
Claim: The Covid-19 restrictions are part of an orchestrated ploy to implement the final phase of UN Agenda 2030, a ‘New World Order’ plan to destroy nation states and depopulate Earth.
Verdict: NONSENSE
Here is the evidence and the verdict for each of the claims:
Julien Behal Photography
Julien Behal Photography
Claim: The government is unelected.
Evidence: A general election was held on 8 February of this year, and three parties formed a coalition majority government in June.
It is often cited that Sinn Féin won more seats than Fine Gael. However, they were unable to garner enough support from other parties in the Dáil to form a government.
It is common for a party to win many seats but not be included in government. For example, at the outset of the 30th Dáil, Fine Gael held more seats than all other parties excluding Fianna Fáil combined but did not enter government.
Verdict: NONSENSE
Dr Ronan Glynn and Prof Philip Nolan speaking at a NPHET briefing. Sasko Lazarov / RollingNews.ie
Sasko Lazarov / RollingNews.ie / RollingNews.ie
Claim: The government is massaging the Covid-19 death rates to inflate them and frighten the public.
Evidence: Let’s start with the basics here: At the time of writing, 1,806 deaths of people with either confirmed, probable, or possible Covid-19 have been reported to the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC).
A death due to Covid-19 is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed Covid-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to Covid disease (eg trauma).
There should be no period of complete recovery from Covid-19 between illness and death. A death due to Covid-19 may not be attributed to another disease (eg cancer) and should be counted independently of pre-existing conditions that are suspected of triggering a severe course of Covid-19.
The result is that Covid-19 was a factor in all of those 1,806 deaths.
When this figure is quoted, the fact that many of these people had underlying conditions is often wheeled-out. That is a far-right trope used to suggest Covid-19 death rates are being inflated as a way of justifying continued restrictions on the public.
A report by the HPSC did highlight that the vast majority of people who have died with a positive diagnosis of Covid-19 had an underlying condition.
What is classed as an underlying condition can range from cancer to diabetes and high blood pressure. An underlying condition does not mean that the person was already sick and possibly going to pass away anyway.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health said:
It is important to note that a third of people in Ireland (32%) have a long-standing health condition. This is a significant part of our society. Every single person with an underlying medical condition is important. Their lives matter.
Those with underlying medical conditions who have died from Covid-19 may have continued to live for a long time if they had not contracted it.
Another factor here is that the government and relevant health authorities provide enough data to ensure confidence that the figures are not being massaged. In fact, the “probable” and “possible” deaths are occasionally denotified, meaning it has been deemed that the person did not die with Covid-19.
This is flagged in press releases and noted at National Public Health Emergency Team briefings – see an example for yourself here.
But the CFR doesn’t paint a true picture of the situation.
The IFR is an estimate that takes into account cases we don’t know about. Maybe people were asymptomatic, fell outside of their country’s testing regime, or just didn’t present for a test, and so they were never counted as a confirmed case. The IFR takes this into account.
That’s what this 99.8% figure is, it’s an IFR of 0.2%.
This exact figure quoted by on the leaflet – 99.8% – likely originates from the Centre for Disease Control in the United States, which estimated back in June the mortality rate to be 0.26%.
But the same document made a range of predictions, including a “best estimate” of 0.4%, USA Today reports.
That figure is now out of date. The CDC’s current best estimate is as follows:
It’s also a very crude measurement of a very complex disease. We know that even if you clinically “recover” – as in, become symptom-free and test negative – people are left with life-changing complications as a result of Covid-19.
And the remaining 20%? 15% will end up in hospital requiring oxygen, and 5% will end up on a ventilator.
These fractions of severe illness also vary by country – for example in Ireland, in the region of 10% of people end up in hospital, while in the United Kingdom it’s 30% – and is highly dependent on the level of testing and the demographics involved.
These figures would have skewed higher earlier in the pandemic when testing wasn’t as widely available.
WHO’s figures are from when we didn’t know as much as we know now about the virus. The CDC estimated more recently that 40% of cases have no symptoms.
One significant study looked at examples from numerous settings – ranging from the Diamond Princess cruise ship to a homeless shelter in Boston – and suggested a similar rate.
Others small studies yield an estimate of between 30% and 40%, as the Guardian reports here, quoting a study from Iceland and another of Japanese citizens evacuated from Wuhan.
This could happen if you’re found to be a close contact of a confirmed case but have yet to develop symptoms, or you could be completely asymptomatic for the duration of the infection.
These fractions of severe and critical infection would be higher than what is observed for influenza infection.
Put simply, more people will experience severe illness as a result of Covid-19 than of influenza.
Remember as well that we can vaccinate against and treat people with influenza. This is not the case for Covid-19.
Let’s roll back to the leaflet’s unproven claim on the mortality rate: if their own figure of 0.2% was true, this is still double the infection fatality rate for the flu.
Excess mortality – the ‘extra’ deaths that occur in a society outside of the norm – also shows that Covid-19 is having a more severe impact than the flu.
Another simple way of looking at it is this: During the 2018/2019 influenza season, the two viruses in circulation – H1N1 and H3N2 – killed a total of 97 people in Ireland.
The mortality rate is still not a perfect gauge. As FullFact highlights here, all the evidence points towards Covid-19 being a much more contagious illness with a higher fraction of people developing severe illness.
Finally, here’s a quote from Dr Colm Henry, chief clinical officer with the HSE, from a NPHET briefing last month:
[Covid-19 is] not like the flu. If you look at the admission rates, those who are admitted who then need intensive care – let me give you an example. During the first phase, 12% of people admitted to hospital needed intensive care.
This is not the flu. This is a serious illness, which can cause death and which we’re now learning has serious after-effects. There’s a price to be paid for even young people catching Covid-19.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: The WHO admits the virus is not believed to spread through surfaces.
[Droplets expelled by people coughing, sneezing, or speaking] can land on objects and surfaces around the person such as tables, doorknobs and handrails. People can become infected by touching these objects or surfaces, then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. This is why it is important to wash your hands regularly with soap and water or clean with alcohol-based hand rub.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: The WHO admits the virus is not believed to spread through the air.
Evidence: The World Health Organisation has remained mostly on the fence about airborne transmission of Covid-19, known as aerosol transmission.
We must divide this up into two areas: Healthcare settings, and non-healthcare settings.
Verdict: Mostly FALSE as WHO has not given a definite opinion this
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: Staying indoors weakens physical and mental health.
Evidence: There is evidence which points towards staying indoors and not going outdoors as being bad for your mental and physical health - but this has never been suggested by the Irish government or health authorities during this pandemic.
Evidence: The World Health Organisation advises that wearing face coverings – including medical masks such as N95- or FFP3-rated devices – does not reduce oxygen intake.
“The prolonged use of medical masks can be uncomfortable,” the advice reads.
However, it does not lead to CO2 intoxication nor oxygen deficiency. While wearing a medical mask, make sure it fits properly and that it is tight enough to allow you to breathe normally. Do not re-use a disposable mask and always change it as soon as it gets damp.
These are routinely worn by employees in areas such as healthcare and construction.
Experts say you’re to treat them the same as your underwear. And you’re washing and changing your underwear frequently, right? We hope you are, anyway. And what if your underwear is wet or soiled?
Let’s stop – you get the gist. Common sense applies here.
But even if your mask hasn’t been cleaned in a few days, you will not run the risk of fungal or bacterial infections.
Evidence: Health experts have told AFP Fact Check this is just not correct and there is no scientific evidence to support it.
It quotes the American Lung Association, which said that ‘there is absolutely no scientific evidence that mask wearing or physical distancing weakens the immune system’.
A very large number of clinical trials and scientific studies have proven HPV vaccines, including Gardasil, to be highly effective in preventing the virus that causes 70% of cervical cancer
These trials and studies have also proven HPV vaccines, including Gardasil, to be very safe, with extremely low rates of serious possible side effects (four out of 195,270 vaccinated individuals experienced a serious side effect following vaccination, that’s 0.002%)
What little scientific research has been done contradicting this overwhelming consensus, has consistently been shown to be flawed and unreliable
There is no evidence whatsoever that HPV vaccination caused the health difficulties observed among the 400 young women represented by the group Regret.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: The HPV vaccine can increase the risk of cancer by 44%
Evidence. Before we begin exploring the evidence, it’s important to stress – as demonstrated by our previous FactCheck – that there is an overwhelming body of evidence to show that the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is safe. That alone is almost grounds to dismiss this claim.
The claim originates in a 2006 report on the commonly used Gardasil vaccine.
There were more than 20,000 people involved in this trial.
In one study group of almost 300 people, a negative efficacy of 44.6% was recorded; there were more cases of CIN 2/3 – abnormal cells found on the surface of the cervix – in the placebo group than the group who received the vaccine.
However, this paints an inaccurate picture of the efficacy of the vaccine.
He explained that a small percentage, in the region of 1% or 2%, of the entire cohort involved in this study had an HPV infection at the beginning of this study:
Since they were already infected at the beginning of the trial, they didn’t get any benefit from the vaccine.
He notes as well that it was such a small group among a larger study that it isn’t statistically significant:
When you looked at the larger picture, we didn’t find that the vaccine increased their risk.
Again, this study is from more than a decade ago.
Let’s look at a larger group from a more recent piece of research.
This finding was not replicated. Instead, they found:
“Our results provide strong evidence that HPV vaccination works to prevent cervical cancer in real-world settings as both HPV infections that cause most cervical cancers and precancerous cervical lesions are decreasing.”
This is just one of the many studies that prove the vaccine’s efficacy. Another was published this month, with a sample size of more than 1.6 million – the conclusion was that “among Swedish girls and women 10 to 30 years old, quadrivalent HPV vaccination was associated with a substantially reduced risk of invasive cervical cancer at the population level”.
Verdict: FALSE
PA Images
PA Images
Claim: India cut ties with Bill Gates after doctors linked the polio vaccine to thousands of cases of childhood paralysis.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation continues to operate in India, working with a range of organisations from local government to community groups with an aim to improve ‘the lives of India’s poor and marginalised’.
The same publication notes that elevated levels of paralysis in some parts of the world, such as the United Kingdom where there is no polio vaccination programme, have not been linked to the vaccine. Instead, it can be the result of increased monitoring or other illnesses.
An element which is often quoted with this conspiracy is that circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) can occur, but a number of factors must be present, such as poor sanitation and an under-immunised population. After the deactivated virus from the vaccine is excreted, it can then be picked up by humans again, and if allowed to circulate for a significant period of time, it can undergo enough mutations to become a dangerous illness again.
This is extremely rare – WHO highlights that 10 billion doses of the oral polio vaccine have been administered since 2000, with just 760 cases of cVDPV, and a number of changes to the genetic makeup of the vaccine allows the risk to be further reduced.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: Vaccines contain material from aborted babies which can alter the recipient’s DNA
Evidence: The trope that vaccines contain material from terminations derives from how genetic material from aborted fetuses was used to start cell lines. These allow some vaccines to be produced; a cell substrate is used to create large quantities of the virus.
For example, fibroblast cells from the lungs of two aborted fetuses, obtained with permission in the 1960s and from women who sought terminations for unrelated reasons were used to create the MRC-5 and WI-38 cell lines used to create vaccines for measles, mumps, rubella, rabies, and polio, among many others. The original cells or genetic tissue no longer exist, but the cell line continues to function as required. If any of the cell line’s DNA structure still exists in the vaccine itself, it exists in minute quantities, and is not able to interact with your own DNA, as ABC News reports.
“But by and large, new technologies have come along, making cells derived from aborted fetuses no longer necessary.”
The Catholic Church opposes abortion but there is support for vaccination programmes, even with this in mind, if no other vaccine is available.
There is absolutely no evidence that human or animal DNA in a vaccine could alter your own DNA. This, as Reuters explains here, is simply not how vaccines work.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: More than 80 studies link vaccines to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.
Claim: More than $4 billion has been paid out for vaccine injuries and death.
Evidence: The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the United States has paid out this amount.
The programme was set up in the 1980s to provide financial compensation to people seeking legal redress who are found to have been injured by a vaccine.
Even in cases where the person is not found to have been injured, they may still receive compensation through a settlement.
Billions of doses of vaccine have been administered to people in the US in recent decades: there were 3.4 billion doses given between 2006 and 2017 alone, for example.
Since 1988, a total of 6,600 people have received compensation from the programme. This means that for every million doses of vaccine that were administered in the US, roughly 1 person got money from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Programme (NVICP).
Of these, 70% of the claims were settled (meaning no conclusion was made, including a few dozen off the now-discredited Wakefield study).
Many of the remaining cases related to vaccine delivery (such as alleged shoulder injuries). FactCheck.org has an extensive piece here on the scheme.
Of these, almost half were connected with a whooping cough vaccine that has not been used for two decades. A further 90 were connected with a flu vaccine.
In fact, the programme is cited as a demonstration of how overwhelmingly safe vaccines are due to the low number of successful claims.
A report in the US by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated that vaccines prevented more than 730,000 deaths among children in the US and over 21 million hospitalisations from 1993 to 2013.
Verdict: MISLEADING
Claim: The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe
Evidence: This is a complex one.
Firstly, the term “unavoidably unsafe” originates in a piece of US legal opinion known as the Restatement of Torts § 402A (1965).
The choice of language was one that doesn’t properly express that this is actually a positive term. A product that is “unavoidably unsafe” should be given protection from liability due to the benefit it offers to society despite its inherent risks, and is the opposite of “unreasonably dangerous”.
Bruesewitz v. Wyeth was a 2011 case taken in the US Supreme Court centered on whether Congress, in passing the law which created the aforementioned NVICP, had this “unavoidably unsafe” phrase in mind when it referred to “side effects that were unavoidable”.
It boils down to whether vaccine manufacturers should be open to liability if it can be proved that there is a better design for their product – essentially one which is safer – or if these companies are exempt as long as they properly prepare the vaccine and provide adequate warnings.
The Supreme Court decided the latter: Vaccines do not fall into the category of ‘unavoidably unsafe’.
Doris Ress, a professor of Law at UC Hastings College of Law in California, offers a clear explanation of this here.
Verdict: FALSE
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Claim: The Covid-19 restrictions are part of an orchestrated ploy to implement the final phase of UN Agenda 2030, a ‘New World Order’ plan to destroy nation states and depopulate Earth.
Evidence:The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a non-binding resolution from the United Nations, is more concerned with the likes of water management and gender equality than world domination.
This is a long-running conspiracy theory that regained momentum recently, particularly on social media like Facebook.
Read more about how it has been seized upon by conspiracy theorists and the far right here.
Verdict: NONSENSE
Edited by Christine Bohan. Additional reporting from previous FactChecks by Órla Ryan and Dan Mac Guill.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
It is vital that we surface facts from noise. Articles like this one brings you clarity, transparency and balance so you can make well-informed decisions.
We set up FactCheck in 2016 to proactively expose false or misleading information, but to continue to deliver on this mission we need your support.
Over 5,000 readers like you support us. If you can, please consider setting up a monthly payment or making a once-off donation to keep news free to everyone.
FactCheck
The Journal's monthly FactCheck newsletter keeps you in the loop about what misinformation trends Ireland is experiencing - and how we're fighting back. Sign up here
The fact that it says it comes from Anti-Corruption Ireland tells you all you need to know. A bunch of misfits banded together by a shared delusion under the guidance of some extremely nasty pieces of work. Excellent for the fireplace on these cold evenings.
@OnlyHereForTheComments: Admit that the leaflet omitted one of the most sophisticated conspiracies ever: SLICED BREAD! As we now know – metal blades are used to cut the bread. The special blades leave tiny metal particles on each slice you ingest. Those particles then circulate in your bloodstream and settle eventually in your brain causing corrosion. Corroded brains are frankly easier to be subverted. If you eat a lot of sliced bread or sliced buns – like the ones in burgers you may turn ginger. In extreme cases your skin may show orange tinge…Mental effects can manifest (but are not limited to) as urge to inject bleach, or insert UV light source inside your body. You may also be more prone to adultery and violence but touting family values and protection of life (especially life if somebody else’s womb). Weird ha? Believe it or not – but NGO,WHO,BMW,KFC,FBI,deep state and Johnny Depp are all in it.
The best article I’ve seen on The Journal in a while. Well done Nicky Ryan, you clearly put a lot of effort into this and it paid off. Informative, factual and debunking the ridiculous information thats been circulated. Great job, I’m very impressed
@Michael Maher: I spoke to the aliens and they told me in no uncertain terms that it wasn’t them. This was backed up by their lizard people friends. They even took off their skin suits to tell me.
I just want to cry. Because of these nut jobs, it’s impossible to have a proper debate about how to live with Covid and the fact that debate is so limited allows this nonsense to profligate. There are legitimate questions re how cases are counted, for example. They are counted according to WHO guidelines. WHO guidelines are important for the monitoring of the extent of the virus, but not its impact. They’re important for the study of epidemiology, but not necessarily for public health reasons. But we can’t have debates because of the likes of those people.
@Anne Marie Devlin: if we can’t have a debate, it’s not the fault of these individuals, it’s the fault of media and government for creating a situation where debate is impossible. Not all the experts agree with NEPHET and many are in complete opposition to the current plan. Only problem is that mainstream media has made debate on this issue very difficult.
@Adam Conroy: The people who published this leaflet have made a number of statements. The author of this article has rebutted these statements with facts, showing them to be mostly incorrect. Sounds a bit Iike a debate to me.
@Kavsie: you are correct in your statement, however in March, the view concerning masks was that they would NOT prevent the person wearing it from contracting the virus and that particular piece of advice has NOT changed. The difference now is that they realised that it could prevent someone already infected from transmitting the virus, and since the virus has an incubation period of up to a couple weeks before symptoms show, if ever, it is safer for everyone to wear some form of face covering rather than unknowingly spread it.
@Anne Marie Devlin: Sure I debated your assumptions re “There are legitimate concerns re how cases are counted”& you didn’t answer me!
Also re your assumption re “They’re important for the study of epidemiology but not necessarily for public health reasons”,I gave he definition of epidemiology.Epidemiology is the foundation of public health & epidemiology and public health are studied together in Universities.
Public health is ‘often defined as the organised efforts of society to prevent disease and to promote health’
@Anne Marie Devlin:
you’re just twisting things there – trying to imply that our lack of objectivity in the media is caused by these people who released the pamphlet. In fact it is the EXACT opposite.
This type of pamphlet is being released because there is no objectivity left in the media. And yes, the pamphlet goes to the other extreme I agree.. and thats the unfortunate reality when you lose that objectivity.
Question : take Luke O Neill etc. When did you ever see him challenged on TV/Radio by one of his peers with a counter-viewpoint. The answer is simply NEVER. He talks alone, un-challenged. Almost nightly !! And that type of thing is the root cause of your problem. You say you want to see things discussed openly. Well take that up with the media, not with whoever released the pamphlet. Its easier to blame them, because it means youre still part of the groupthink, but youre zoning in on the wrong culprit this time.
@Domhnall O’Sullivan:
There are doctors, medics, thousands of them worldwide who think the reaction to this virus is dis-proportiante and mis-placed. They don’t align with 90% of what is written in the pamphlet but they still disagree with the measures being taken.
when you lose the objectivity, all of these people get lumped into the one pot. the “against” pot – but theyre viewpoints are very varied and different. that pamphlet is the full on extreme side of it..
@Teresa Ryan: I’ll answer you clearly Teresa, I know 2 people that had COVID, one died back in April from it and the other had very minor symptoms and none of his family contracted it.
How many do you know?
@Teresa Ryan: I know 8 people between here and the UK.
One was hospitalised for a couple of days, but is now fine.
3 were in bed for days and said it was horrible. 2 said it was like a bad cold, but with loss of sense of smell and taste and
2 hardly noticed they had it at all.
But 4 of the above weeks later still are out of breath walking up stairs etc.
I also know my mam has friends that have had it. My neighbour told me 5 people in her workplace had it.
I’m amazed you don’t know anyone who has had it.
@Teresa Ryan: If you can’t see the correlation Teresa, you exhibit your inability to see how silly your question was in the first place. BTW, I’ve had two neighbours die from it. My cousin had it. Two people I work with are off currently with covid. So yeah, to answer your question; it does exist and it’s not made up.
The morans that post these flyers and march really madden me! Do they not get it, if the hospital get overwhelmed by this virus it has a knock on affect on every aspect of health and the economy. These honestly have too much time, self importance and not enough brainscell to understand that they need to cop on to them self! We are all trying act in solidarity and dont need to listen to this nonsense by people who are too thick to find themself a productive hobby for themselves!
@Claire Joyce: Very good comment,Clare.Re your second sentence,I’ve tried to highlight that for months now but you’ve put it better!
Some who constantly criticize the public health advice and guidelines often talk about people waiting for hospital appointments, procedures and about jobs, businesses and the economy but fail to realise that the very basic public health advice and guidelines thry are critical of are the key to substantially reducing transmission of the virus, therefore more& more patients can be seen, businesses can remain open thereby protecting jobs,etc.
@Nuala Mc Namara: i am one of those who criticize the public health advice, there is a big difference between the likes of me who think that hospital procedures and consultations should have kept going under tight health restrictions and the likes of these people who are basically saying the whole thing is a pack of lies. You have been very vocal on here with you3 respect for the government and thats your opinion which is fine, respect those who may not agree with everything that’s issued as it doesn’t mean we have the same views as these.
@Madethyme: You obviously haven’t seen my other comments re Government!
More patients are been seen since initial lockdown and more could be seen if people try their best to follow the public health advice and guidelines.
@Dolphins: Ah I see you skipped the article and jump straight to the comments. Try reading it for facts and evidence. Then read again because it prop take you a few attempts to understand. This method is called learning. You should try it all the time in life.
They got one part right staying indoors most definitely does weaken your physical health, your not gonna get proper exercise sitting on your sofa, and it’s good for your mental health to get out and about.
@SB: and if we follow the guidelines, no one needs to stay indoors…but if these nut jobs continue spreading the misinformation that they do, some will believe them, and end up spreading this damned virus, and we will end up back where we were….indoors in a lock down. One point right out on a page of wrong ones does not justify their actions
@SB: The ironic thing is that the people complaining that we were “only” allowed exercise for one hour during the last lockdown are probably looking at 4chan in their parents’ basements all day.
The media loves this type of stuff because it discredits alternative views.
The rational argument is that Sweden has not had a massive amounts of deaths with no lockdown. And that we would predict in the region of 5000 based on their outcome. So we should be having a debate about what is a lesser evil, 5000 dead from covid or mass societal damage from lock down.
Why are they posting from Gemma and not from the experts who spoke about a controlled spread last week
@Niall Dunne: The Swedes claim they had a lockdown, just that it was “lighter” than others. In any case, in spite of their “light” lockdown, they had 6 times the number of deaths as Germany and Denmark, nine times the Finnish death toll and eleven times the Norwegian toll. If Sweden had done as well as the neighbouring countries, who jumped on the virus early and hard, about five thousand Swedes could still be alive.
The second wave is not causing nearly as many deaths so far in any European country – and won’t if we have the common sense to abide by the guidelines – because the vulnerable are being careful and because treatment is better, but that’s too late for 5,000 Swedes. And imho, 5,000 is a massive amount of dead people.
@Niall Dunne: Oh Sweden again…this utopian myth has been totally debunked – even they admitted there were mistakes made. They now have common sense rules similar to ours and their numbers are going up again so the whole herd immunity argument is shot.
Anyone who believes nonsense from the anti corruption group who promote this conspiracy theorists stuff need to have reality check on there life and the direction its going
Thank you. It’s about time someone took the loons on head on. the traction they have been getting on social media is worrying. I think people’s ability to think for themselves is being affected by their frustration with the necessary restrictions. It leaves people open to manipulation by the far right as it easier to dismiss the need for restrictions if you can dismiss the virus as over hyped or a hoax etc again thanks for the good work on debunking their crap all in one place.
I love your use of the word “nonsense”. The tinfoil hat brigade in full flow. They are off their rockers but the sad thing is people believe their nonsense.
@Gary Mc Aree: maybe that’s what it is with me so Gary, my lungs working harder, I find it hard to breathe when my mask goes on it the morning, I find myself taking huge breaths as if trying to get more oxygen, I asked the doctor I work with why and he said it’s lack of oxygen, nothing that’s going to kill me but that’s what it is
Thank you for your fact checking. But of cource the Germans are just as full of world order theories as well as the Irish. These leaflets etc. appear to be well organised. What is the point behind it all?
@Eamonn Ferry: Leaflets like these appear well organised because these days, even stupid people have access to desktop publishing, the internet, etc. Centuries ago, they could only have talked nonsense to their immediate community, but now they can see each others’ nonsense online and their fist thought is “hey, that person agrees with me – we must both be right!”, when in fact they’re both talking nonsense. Add in manipulative people leaving nonsense for them to find, and we have today’s situation.
bring back media objectivity. discuss the important issues openly. are the measures necessary? Is the test for cases way too sensitive? was immunity even partially built during the summer – how could it be built more?
Let the medics/experts who disagree with the narrative debate these things openly and then pamphlets like this will disappear or become so marginalised they wont matter..
@Edel Quinn: You wont be laughing for long after you get your vaccination The question is will you do some real research or just go with the Journal’s spin. You really should.
A little behind the curve with this article. There’s been various forms of this same leaflet doing the rounds for a few months. Unfortunately some people are starting to believe this nonsense because they’re disillusioned with what has happened.
If some of these lies had been debunked publicly earlier they might not have gotten any traction but sadly more and more people are getting swayed in their thinking.
Woman (30s) hospitalised after serious assault in south Dublin
18 mins ago
785
Courts
30-year-old Wexford woman remanded in custody on firearms charges
58 mins ago
2.7k
social welfare changes
If you lose your job and have worked for 5 years you'll get up to €450 a week under new rules
14 hrs ago
38.6k
76
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 161 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 110 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 143 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 113 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 83 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 39 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 35 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 134 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 61 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 74 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 83 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 37 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 46 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 27 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 92 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 99 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 72 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 53 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 88 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 69 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say