Coronavirus outbreak

[Poacher]

As i thought. You're putting word into my mouth. You were hoping i'd say words along the lines of your supplied answer. I'll ask you a question. Do you give a toss about the high rise of suicides and the many private sector workers about to lose their jobs,homes etc if they haven't done so already?

Do you give a toss about the high rise of suicides and the many private sector workers about to lose their jobs, homes etc if they haven't done so already as a result of Brexit?

Edit: AND public sector workers.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Do you give a toss about the high rise of suicides and the many private sector workers about to lose their jobs, homes etc if they haven't done so already as a result of Brexit?

Edit: AND public sector workers.

Yes i do,but not so much for public sector workers.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

What do you have against public sector workers?

 

[kingrollo]

@kingrollo

That, as you rightly say, is one of the basic principles of medicine.

But, I know I tread on very dangerous ground here, the pandemic has highlighted this as an issue:

Is it right to value all lives equally?
Should a criterion be Years of Life lost?

I saw (sorry, can't find the article now) an article comparing the Pandemic spend on saving a year of life to the Health care planning numbers used. The disparity was orders of magnitude.

This snippet from a 2018 article is pertinent.
https://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/...earch-methods/1a-epidemiology/years-lost-life

and this WHO paper makes the concept real,

The rationale for use Years of life are lost (YLL) take into account the age at which deaths occur by giving greater weight to deaths at younger age and lower weight to deaths at older age. The years of life lost (percentage of total) indicator measures the YLL due to a cause as a proportion of the total YLL lost in the population due to premature mortality.

https://www.who.int/whosis/whostat2006YearsOfLifeLost.pdf?ua=1

So, the question that Accy puts rather crudely is actually moot:

How to balance the direct loss of life in the pandemic against indirect loss of life resulting from pandemic control measures.

Or, closer to the basic principle you posited:

Two patients arrive, with an identical short term fatal short term condition. For which you have one life saving "dose".
Who gets it the 25-year-old or the 95-year-old?
If the 95-year-old arrives 5 minutes before the 25-year-old do you rescind the instruction to give the dose to the 95-year-old?

Tough, tough questions.

I do think that is a slightly different point to one accy posted.

Accy - was saying that pushing long term problems to back of the queue was going to create more health issues than if we just let covid run through unchecked. You only have think about that for 5 minutes and realise the flaws in his argument.

Very often the choice sorts itself out- the 85 who needs a new hip - has other issues that prevent the surgery going ahead etc.

I had cause a few years back to read my CCG policy on procedures of limited clinical value - which is guidance along the lines of you're example (obviously not so extreme) - quite an alarming document really.

 

[kingrollo]

What do you have against public sector workers?

We get inflation busting pay rises ! (He reads the daily mail).

I didn't get a pay rise for 8 years - last couple have been 2% and 1% - my 0.5% due in April - has now been halted.

For 17 years I have paid approx £230 a month into pension - that's forecast to give me a pension of £5k per year !

But like I say he reads the daily mail.

 

[Jenkins]

We get inflation busting pay rises ! (He reads the daily mail).

I didn't get a pay rise for 8 years - last couple have been 2% and 1% - my 0.5% due in April - has now been halted.

For 17 years I have paid approx £230 a month into pension - that's forecast to give me a pension of £5k per year !

But like I say he reads the daily mail.

This - very much so.

 

[MntnMan62]

Yes i do,but not so much for public sector workers.

All he's doing is trying to get a rise out of people. While he may actually believe the stuff he blurts out, I ask you, does it really matter what he thinks? Think about it.

 

[Accy cyclist]

All he's doing is trying to get a rise out of people. While he may actually believe the stuff he blurts out, I ask you, does it really matter what he thinks? Think about it.

Typical! That's how you lefties think. Anyone disagreeing with me must be a 'troll' or a 'troublemaker'. I've had my say. I think this virus is being used for sinister reasons,but you keep on wearing your mask/muzzle and slowly walk into totalitarianism.👍

Edit..By the way,all left wingers aren't pro lockdown and many right wingers are pro lockdown. I can easily identify with anyone who sees sinister things happening,regardless of their political allegiance.

 

[Unkraut]

... you keep on wearing your mask/muzzle and slowly walk into totalitarianism.

I am not of the left, and certainly don't want to walk into totalitarianism of either the left or the right, but I'm happy to wear the mask if it prevents me or anyone else being stretchered into casualty.

 

[classic33]

"C19 rate per 100,000 for tests carried out 7 days prior to 21/11 was 333 down from 367 on 20/11. The rate is still too high. We need to keep up the good work and continue to do the 3 big things to protect those we love, our communities and NHS and social care services."

What would you interpret the above as actually saying?
The figures and dates more than anything else.

 

[MntnMan62]

Typical! That's how you lefties think. Anyone disagreeing with me must be a 'troll' or a 'troublemaker'. I've had my say. I think this virus is being used for sinister reasons,but you keep on wearing your mask/muzzle and slowly walk into totalitarianism.👍

Edit..By the way,all left wingers aren't pro lockdown and many right wingers are pro lockdown. I can easily identify with anyone who sees sinister things happening,regardless of their political allegiance.

That's the thing about you though. You don't provide any rationale for your point of view. You make your point and then expect everyone else to prove why your point isn't valid. You can't even debate your own side of the issue, let alone counter someone elses. I'm finding this quite entertaining.

And by the way, I'm not a left winger. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[Accy cyclist]

I am not of the left, and certainly don't want to walk into totalitarianism of either the left or the right, but I'm happy to wear the mask if it prevents me or anyone else being stretchered into casualty.

Would you be happy to make a stand and stop the potential forced vaccination of many people?

 

[MntnMan62]

Would you be happy to make a stand and stop the potential forced vaccination of many people?

What do you find wrong with people willingly accepting being vaccinated based upon a full understanding of the vaccine and it's testing history?

 

[classic33]

What do you find wrong with people willingly accepting being vaccinated based upon a full understanding of the vaccine and it's testing history?

I doubt if there is anyone with a full understanding of the vaccines and their testing history.

Last time I checked, there were ten seperate ones.

 

[Unkraut]

Would you be happy to make a stand and stop the potential forced vaccination of many people?

Yes I would, but I'm not convinced at this distance that this is actually on the cards in the UK. Both Germany and France have said any vaccine will be voluntary. If there is an attempt to make it compulsory in the UK, the preparation for this goes back long before Corona to a pre-existing malaise in the political system regardless of the political hue of the government.