Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: CV and mad panic behaviour (Read 943650 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 32 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4725 –
Quote from: Mav – on
Given there'll be pressure on hospitals to cope with Covid-related admissions, I would fully support ethical rules regarding access being amended so the unvaccinated are at the end of the queue.  By unvaccinated, I mean those who were eligible for vaccination (excluding those who had a legitimate medical reason for their failure to vaccinate). Doctors and nurses have gnashed their teeth over anti-vaxxers in the US receiving double-lung transplants when Covid catches up with them. If you have to choose who gets beds and who is sent home, their vaccination status should be a prime criterion.
I understand this position but I'm not sure I'd agree, it sends a society down a specific path that is not based on social equity, to me the ultimate path of this direction becomes health care for the wealthy.

Why do I think that?

Because access to something like acute health care will depend on a status, and the cost of achieving that status will rise as a defacto form of regulation, just purely based on market forces. There will always be some better level of care available to the wealthy, and that will mean they end up at the front of the queue as the best candidate for such procedures.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"
 

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4726 –
AFAIK, variations on this already occur. Whether someone is willing to give us smoking affects eligibility for transplants and the like (I stand to be corrected on this).

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4727 –
Quote from: shawny – on
So what hope do we have LP? 

You are never ever ever going to get full and total adhering of every rule by every single person in the community. And if it only take a hand full of people out of 6mil to cause it to fail it means the plan is not feasible and it has 0% of success.

Hence why I said we better stop listening to the carrot danglers in power and admit we are living like this for a very very very long time as we have no credible plan to work to.

I've been saying since our very first lockdown, the biggest problem our government has is that it trusts the people to do the right thing.

Now they've done their best to try and achieve this, but you will never get it. Thats why they 'dangle the carrot' because its a way of keeping more people in line in the hope of eliminating this.

If the government says, 2 months of lockdown, people lose their $h!t and don't follow the rules from day 1.
If the government says 2 weeks, and then.....2 weeks and then....2 weeks...etc. People are more able to cope "its only just 2 weeks"

However, we are getting to the 'boy who cried wolf' side of things and its no longer working.

A new strategy needs to be put in place....somehow....to try and curb this before its too late.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4728 –
Quote from: Mav – on
AFAIK, variations on this already occur. Whether someone is willing to give us smoking affects eligibility for transplants and the like (I stand to be corrected on this).
Yes this is true.

But I'd argue that is not a variation on the same concept, smoking is relatively free and ubiquitous being equally available to both poor and wealthy.

The fear I have is that the ultimate selection of candidates for health care would be favoured or influenced by some highly expensive treatment that was beyond the reach of the average person.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4729 –
Quote from: Mav – on
Given there'll be pressure on hospitals to cope with Covid-related admissions, I would fully support ethical rules regarding access being amended so the unvaccinated are at the end of the queue.  By unvaccinated, I mean those who were eligible for vaccination (excluding those who had a legitimate medical reason for their failure to vaccinate). Doctors and nurses have gnashed their teeth over anti-vaxxers in the US receiving double-lung transplants when Covid catches up with them. If you have to choose who gets beds and who is sent home, their vaccination status should be a prime criterion.

Right so if thats your thinking im guessing you would also be fine with if you are over the ideal weight range and now need heart bi-pass surgery you will happily go to back and let all those young, fit people patients ahead of you? 

What if you smoked 20 years ago and now need lung cancer treatment your fine to go to the back behind all those who never smoked.

If you drink and require treatment to your liver or a related organ you go behind all those who never touched the bottle.

What about melanoma - if you sunbaked or went in a solarium you go to the back over a young person with fair skin that has never seen the sun?  

And if you're a diabetic and overweight....  sorry mate back of the line as there is young fit people who care for their body well ahead of your sorry self. 

I could go on and on.

Majority of us will fit into one of these categories and easy to make these rules about a topic that suits you but are you also happy to apply similar thinking across all health matters even when you will be at the back of the queue? 

Be honest now..... 

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4730 –
There is some irony hidden in protests of the anti-vaxxers and COVID deniers, that perhaps the greatest social leveller is globally available cheap and effective vaccination.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4731 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
I've been saying since our very first lockdown, the biggest problem our government has is that it trusts the people to do the right thing.

Spot on.

It's that 5-10%, or so, who willfully and consciously ignore the measures to limit the spread, who fck it up for the rest of us.

Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4732 –
Quote from: shawny – on
I could go on and on.
I have no doubt at all about that.

I don't agree with this "opening the floodgates" argument that both LP and you are raising. If the change be specific to Covid cases, then we deal with any attempt to make similar changes in respect of other situations on a case-by-case basis. Making this change wouldn't increase the strength of those attempts.

Triage protocols exist already and various factors are already used by hospitals to ration access. I don't know what factors are used and I suspect that hospitals don't widely disseminate them as pile-ons would ensue.  Maybe EB might know.

In any event, as long as such changes were publicised beforehand, then those who make a choice to remain unvaccinated would make that choice in the full knowledge of its implications. If you know that there won't be a month-long intensive air-sea rescue attempt involving the Navy, Airforce & Border Force if you try to paddle by yourself to NZ, maybe you'd think twice about doing it.     

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4733 –
Mav....what you are saying makes sense if its done correctly.

However, like lockdowns, people don't do things correctly.

Its open for exploitation. Simplest form being the wealthy 'buying' treatment that they would not otherwise get. A little donation here, a favour there, a bump in grades on top....You see my point.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4734 –
That's unavoidable anyway, Kruddler. For instance, as LP notes, monoclonal antibodies are really expensive but rich people can pay for them. It's already an unequal system. The unvaccinated rich would merely jockey for care at private hospitals. That wouldn't be cured if we gave them equal or even preferential access to public hospitals. At least the vaccinated would have to compete against far fewer unvaccinated when it came to obtaining life-saving care.

And the fake immunisation passport would be far less of a problem when it comes to hospital admissions than going to a restaurant. The admissions people could directly access vaccine status in a way that a maitre d' could not.

There was a story today about an unvaccinated woman who was caught flying into Hawaii using a fake immunisation certificate. It wasn't really difficult to spot the breach: her vaccination certificate said she'd been immunised with the "Maderna" vaccine  :))

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4735 –
If we get to 90% would we need vaccine passports?
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4736 –
Quote from: Mav – on
I have no doubt at all about that.

I don't agree with this "opening the floodgates" argument that both LP and you are raising. If the change be specific to Covid cases, then we deal with any attempt to make similar changes in respect of other situations on a case-by-case basis. Making this change wouldn't increase the strength of those attempts.

Triage protocols exist already and various factors are already used by hospitals to ration access. I don't know what factors are used and I suspect that hospitals don't widely disseminate them as pile-ons would ensue.  Maybe EB might know.

In any event, as long as such changes were publicised beforehand, then those who make a choice to remain unvaccinated would make that choice in the full knowledge of its implications. If you know that there won't be a month-long intensive air-sea rescue attempt involving the Navy, Airforce & Border Force if you try to paddle by yourself to NZ, maybe you'd think twice about doing it.     


Based on the fact you didn’t answer any of my post and highlighted just the last throwaway line only, I will take that it’s a clear NO to you accepting being pushed back in the queue - you only want that system applied to Covid patents that have not been vaccinated.

Thought so.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4737 –
You need to work on your English comprehension skills. I stated explicitly that this should only apply to Covid cases. Why read between the lines if you can just read the words instead?

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4738 –
Quote from: Mav – on
You need to work on your English comprehension skills. I stated explicitly that this should only apply to Covid cases. Why read between the lines if you can just read the words instead?

Play the ball mate not the man- I know it may be hard when you someone asks you a question you don’t want to answer.

So the bottom line once you remove all the spin is the rule ‘only applies Covid cases’ 🙄

So typical.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4739 –
Don't try the "I had to parse your posts extremely carefully to prove that you won't apply that rule other than to Covid because you were trying to hide that fact" game when I stated it explicitly.