COVID-19 in Trinidad & Tobago (Local Updates & Discussions Only)

[Dohplaydat]

Ok if it is my CHOICE not to take such I will face the consequences of a virus with 3 percent mortality rate......the ppl that need the vaccine who sickly taking the Vax and still dying so whats your point


RIP Kenny J

The issue is not solely the mortality rate. It's the burden on the ENTIRE healthcare system. What do they say in the briefings, 75% of ambulance trips are to move covid paitients? Accident and Emergency full of people presenting with severe covid symptoms?

Statistically if 15% of the hospital admissions are from the 49% of the population vaccinated then with 100% vaccination the total hospital load will be 30% what it currently is. Yeah you may not die from covid. What happens if you get in a car accident and the ambulance takes a few hours to come attend to you? Or you get some other medical complication and show up at A&E and have to wait for them to deal with 70% more patients who have covid than they should. THIS is the way that the unvaccinated are harming the vaccinated.

Hover and other antivaxxers do not care about the greater good. I can't tell if it's their stupidity, selfishness or fear that makes them ignorant of this fact.

But they should have started charging unvaccinated patients for treatment months now.

[DMan7]

Ok if it is my CHOICE not to take such I will face the consequences of a virus with 3 percent mortality rate......the ppl that need the vaccine who sickly taking the Vax and still dying so whats your point


RIP Kenny J

The issue is not solely the mortality rate. It's the burden on the ENTIRE healthcare system. What do they say in the briefings, 75% of ambulance trips are to move covid paitients? Accident and Emergency full of people presenting with severe covid symptoms?

Statistically if 15% of the hospital admissions are from the 49% of the population vaccinated then with 100% vaccination the total hospital load will be 30% what it currently is. Yeah you may not die from covid. What happens if you get in a car accident and the ambulance takes a few hours to come attend to you? Or you get some other medical complication and show up at A&E and have to wait for them to deal with 70% more patients who have covid than they should. THIS is the way that the unvaccinated are harming the vaccinated.

Hover and other antivaxxers do not care about the greater good. I can't tell if it's their stupidity, selfishness or fear that makes them ignorant of this fact.

But they should have started charging unvaccinated patients for treatment months now.

Or they could just be trolling everyone all this time and they are actually fully vaccinated and boosted as well. When anonymous online yuh could never tell.

[widdyphuck]

Predictions for today

[st7]

Predictions for today

749/35

[DMan7]

Predictions for today

749/35

You bringing people in from another country or wah?

[st7]

Predictions for today

749/35

You bringing people in from another country or wah?

sometimes you just hadda be bold!

[DMan7]

[widdyphuck]

Numbers increasing daily.
By next week is drama

[K74T]

Numbers increasing daily.
By next week is drama

Did you get tested today?

[widdyphuck]

Numbers increasing daily.
By next week is drama

Did you get tested today?

Yea bro. I went early and paid extra to get the test expedited.
Negative all the way.

[redmanjp]

so u really have 2 accounts?

[redmanjp]

the only thing about this is they no longer showing 1st doses- now it getting lumped in with unvaxxed so u dont know if for instance if lots of public servants getting their 1st dose

[pugboy]

so you can pay to have expedited tests now?
lol money making for so

[hover11]

so you can pay to have expedited tests now?
lol money making for so

Money talks in this country

[pugboy]

yeah a plane could be a super spreader site

scrapping pre travel test would plenty positive ppl would be on the plane

[Mmoney607]

Ah yes, arbitrary date in May when no one was fully vaccinated. Perfect.

[adnj]

Legal to vaccinate

2 Caribbean jurists make case for mandatory jabs

Dec 28, 2021 Updated Dec 29, 2021

A case for mandatory vaccination has been legally made by two Caribbean jurists.

Sir Dennis Byron and Prof Rosemarie Antoine submitted the view to the heads of government of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) in a 16-page confidential brief, titled “The Legal Dimensions of Mandatory/Compulsory Requirements for Covid-19 Vaccinations August 2021”.

In their brief to OECS leaders, Byron and Antoine stated that a mandatory Covid-19 vaccine law is likely to be constitutional if governments were to utilise this route in getting their populations vaccinated.

According to regional reports, the document focuses on the legal dimensions of mandatory or compulsory requirement for vaccination.

It stated that the jurists concluded in the document that there is ample provision in the constitution of OECS territories, corresponding jurisprudence and medical data to support mandatory vaccination laws even in the face of counter-arguments alleging violation of rights.

They stated that constitutions around the region generally empower governments to take action which is reasonable and proportional to circumstances or threats which confront society.

They added that the constitution of OECS member states generally gives appropriate leeway for mandatory vaccination as a public health imperative.

Their brief also indicated that employers could justify a mandatory vaccination requirement in the context of a pandemic.

Byron and Antoine stated that it was their view that mandatory vaccination would be especially considered legally sound if, at minimum, it is enforced at workplaces which are considered as high risk.

These include healthcare facilities, other essential services, or generally where workers are on the frontline and interacting with the public during the pandemic.

They stated that a vaccination policy during the pandemic within workplaces would be reasonable – both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee who’d be mandated to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

The jurists stated that increasingly the enduring state of the public health risk that is the Covid-19 pandemic and the science are pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

They added that all actions toward compulsory vaccination must be grounded in a firm belief that the policy is being pursued in the interest of the economy, enterprise, in the public’s interest, in the interest of all workers and as a last resort or necessity.

They stated that ultimately those core principles would be what justify the regional constitutional standard – that actions by the state to confront threats must be reasonable and proportionate.

If those core principles are observed, they stated that the Courts of law in the region are likely to be persuaded that mandatory vaccination is constitutional.

“Having demonstrated that mandatory vaccination is constitutionally appropriate given the leeway granted in favour of public health imperatives, it is submitted that employers could justify a requirement in a pandemic context, at minimum where the workplace is a high-risk environment, such as healthcare, or essential services, or for workers more at risk at the workplace, such as frontline workers interacting with the public,” stated the report.

“It is unlikely that employers would be held to a higher standard than a constitutional standard. This is reasonable both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee himself or herself,” according to the document.

It notes that, increasingly, the enduring state of the pandemic and the science is pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

The jurists stated that medical ethics support mandatory vaccination, as they noted that the legal position mirrors the position emanating from medical ethics, as enshrined in the Nuffield Report, which is relied upon by the World Health Organization that mandatory vaccination “can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate...”


https://trinidadexpress.com/news/local/ ... 3ffb3.html

[De Dragon]

*** Doh beat up, Hoover have ah Seniah Conksel who go say diffrant

[adnj]

Ah yes, arbitrary date in May when no one was fully vaccinated. Perfect.

No.

Not arbitrary.

[hover11]

Legal to vaccinate

2 Caribbean jurists make case for mandatory jabs

Dec 28, 2021 Updated Dec 29, 2021

A case for mandatory vaccination has been legally made by two Caribbean jurists.

Sir Dennis Byron and Prof Rosemarie Antoine submitted the view to the heads of government of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) in a 16-page confidential brief, titled “The Legal Dimensions of Mandatory/Compulsory Requirements for Covid-19 Vaccinations August 2021”.

In their brief to OECS leaders, Byron and Antoine stated that a mandatory Covid-19 vaccine law is likely to be constitutional if governments were to utilise this route in getting their populations vaccinated.

According to regional reports, the document focuses on the legal dimensions of mandatory or compulsory requirement for vaccination.

It stated that the jurists concluded in the document that there is ample provision in the constitution of OECS territories, corresponding jurisprudence and medical data to support mandatory vaccination laws even in the face of counter-arguments alleging violation of rights.

They stated that constitutions around the region generally empower governments to take action which is reasonable and proportional to circumstances or threats which confront society.

They added that the constitution of OECS member states generally gives appropriate leeway for mandatory vaccination as a public health imperative.

Their brief also indicated that employers could justify a mandatory vaccination requirement in the context of a pandemic.

Byron and Antoine stated that it was their view that mandatory vaccination would be especially considered legally sound if, at minimum, it is enforced at workplaces which are considered as high risk.

These include healthcare facilities, other essential services, or generally where workers are on the frontline and interacting with the public during the pandemic.

They stated that a vaccination policy during the pandemic within workplaces would be reasonable – both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee who’d be mandated to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

The jurists stated that increasingly the enduring state of the public health risk that is the Covid-19 pandemic and the science are pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

They added that all actions toward compulsory vaccination must be grounded in a firm belief that the policy is being pursued in the interest of the economy, enterprise, in the public’s interest, in the interest of all workers and as a last resort or necessity.

They stated that ultimately those core principles would be what justify the regional constitutional standard – that actions by the state to confront threats must be reasonable and proportionate.

If those core principles are observed, they stated that the Courts of law in the region are likely to be persuaded that mandatory vaccination is constitutional.

“Having demonstrated that mandatory vaccination is constitutionally appropriate given the leeway granted in favour of public health imperatives, it is submitted that employers could justify a requirement in a pandemic context, at minimum where the workplace is a high-risk environment, such as healthcare, or essential services, or for workers more at risk at the workplace, such as frontline workers interacting with the public,” stated the report.

“It is unlikely that employers would be held to a higher standard than a constitutional standard. This is reasonable both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee himself or herself,” according to the document.

It notes that, increasingly, the enduring state of the pandemic and the science is pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

The jurists stated that medical ethics support mandatory vaccination, as they noted that the legal position mirrors the position emanating from medical ethics, as enshrined in the Nuffield Report, which is relied upon by the World Health Organization that mandatory vaccination “can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate...”


https://trinidadexpress.com/news/local/ ... 3ffb3.html

If you mandating a vaccine then you HAVE to remove that waiver requirement

You legally requiring me to take something into my body against my will and not sharing responsibility for adverse effects, it dont work so

[Redress10]

Legal to vaccinate

2 Caribbean jurists make case for mandatory jabs

Dec 28, 2021 Updated Dec 29, 2021

A case for mandatory vaccination has been legally made by two Caribbean jurists.

Sir Dennis Byron and Prof Rosemarie Antoine submitted the view to the heads of government of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) in a 16-page confidential brief, titled “The Legal Dimensions of Mandatory/Compulsory Requirements for Covid-19 Vaccinations August 2021”.

In their brief to OECS leaders, Byron and Antoine stated that a mandatory Covid-19 vaccine law is likely to be constitutional if governments were to utilise this route in getting their populations vaccinated.

According to regional reports, the document focuses on the legal dimensions of mandatory or compulsory requirement for vaccination.

It stated that the jurists concluded in the document that there is ample provision in the constitution of OECS territories, corresponding jurisprudence and medical data to support mandatory vaccination laws even in the face of counter-arguments alleging violation of rights.

They stated that constitutions around the region generally empower governments to take action which is reasonable and proportional to circumstances or threats which confront society.

They added that the constitution of OECS member states generally gives appropriate leeway for mandatory vaccination as a public health imperative.

Their brief also indicated that employers could justify a mandatory vaccination requirement in the context of a pandemic.

Byron and Antoine stated that it was their view that mandatory vaccination would be especially considered legally sound if, at minimum, it is enforced at workplaces which are considered as high risk.

These include healthcare facilities, other essential services, or generally where workers are on the frontline and interacting with the public during the pandemic.

They stated that a vaccination policy during the pandemic within workplaces would be reasonable – both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee who’d be mandated to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

The jurists stated that increasingly the enduring state of the public health risk that is the Covid-19 pandemic and the science are pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

They added that all actions toward compulsory vaccination must be grounded in a firm belief that the policy is being pursued in the interest of the economy, enterprise, in the public’s interest, in the interest of all workers and as a last resort or necessity.

They stated that ultimately those core principles would be what justify the regional constitutional standard – that actions by the state to confront threats must be reasonable and proportionate.

If those core principles are observed, they stated that the Courts of law in the region are likely to be persuaded that mandatory vaccination is constitutional.

“Having demonstrated that mandatory vaccination is constitutionally appropriate given the leeway granted in favour of public health imperatives, it is submitted that employers could justify a requirement in a pandemic context, at minimum where the workplace is a high-risk environment, such as healthcare, or essential services, or for workers more at risk at the workplace, such as frontline workers interacting with the public,” stated the report.

“It is unlikely that employers would be held to a higher standard than a constitutional standard. This is reasonable both to protect other employees, the interacting public and even the employee himself or herself,” according to the document.

It notes that, increasingly, the enduring state of the pandemic and the science is pointing to even more liberal rationales for compelling vaccines at the workplace.

The jurists stated that medical ethics support mandatory vaccination, as they noted that the legal position mirrors the position emanating from medical ethics, as enshrined in the Nuffield Report, which is relied upon by the World Health Organization that mandatory vaccination “can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate...”


https://trinidadexpress.com/news/local/ ... 3ffb3.html

If you mandating a vaccine then you HAVE to remove that waiver requirement

You legally requiring me to take something into my body against my will and not sharing responsibility for adverse effects, it dont work so

Fire the wuk.

You are free to sue Sinopharm, JJ and Pfizer btw

[st7]

u think he go leave a hand-out zone?

[K74T]

[Dohplaydat]

Screenshot_20220105-184822_Facebook.jpg

Ivermectin selling like Viagra in them pharmacies all over right now.

[pete]

the only thing about this is they no longer showing 1st doses- now it getting lumped in with unvaxxed so u dont know if for instance if lots of public servants getting their 1st dose

It's on supplemental pages. Have to go on the MoH website.

[Dohplaydat]

the only thing about this is they no longer showing 1st doses- now it getting lumped in with unvaxxed so u dont know if for instance if lots of public servants getting their 1st dose

It's on supplemental pages. Have to go on the MoH website.

Anyone know why hospitalizations had such a big bump since moving to this new format? It was around the high 400s for the last month and then suddenly it's jumped to 600+

[DMan7]

the only thing about this is they no longer showing 1st doses- now it getting lumped in with unvaxxed so u dont know if for instance if lots of public servants getting their 1st dose

It's on supplemental pages. Have to go on the MoH website.

Anyone know why hospitalizations had such a big bump since moving to this new format? It was around the high 400s for the last month and then suddenly it's jumped to 600+

It seems the adding the step down facilities to the mix in addition to those in the hospital system.

[Mmoney607]

Ah yes, arbitrary date in May when no one was fully vaccinated. Perfect.

No.

Not arbitrary.

From the one hundred (100) that Barbados vibes we. It was one hundred? Anyway it was a very little bit and all were hcws.

[redmanjp]

Travelers who test positive don't go into step down facilities to quarantine?

I find they should highlight all who are hospitalized as in needing hospital care so the hovers and such know how dire the situation is.m instead of thinking well is just covid positive travellers in state quarantine.

[redmanjp]

Ah yes, arbitrary date in May when no one was fully vaccinated. Perfect.

No.

Not arbitrary.

From the one hundred (100) that Barbados vibes we. It was one hundred? Anyway it was a very little bit and all were hcws.

2000 afaik