Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 " So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die?" In what way do you mean leave them to die, where has suggested leaving anybody to die? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? In what way do you mean leave them to die, where has suggested leaving anybody to die?" Obviously not and was that even discussed ??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? In what way do you mean leave them to die, where has suggested leaving anybody to die?" Remind me again average age of death 82.4 What do you take from that sentence? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die?" No lock them up in care homes to die there  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 " This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? No lock them up in care homes to die there "is that what you want ?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 " I hadn’t realised the average life expectancy in the UK was 81 and that does put the average COVID life expectancy into clear contrast. I do think that the secondary medical impacts (cancer and many other treatments that are being delayed) are only going to get increasingly large and the knock on impacts on education etc are going to have substantial ramifications through multiple generations. I am, increasingly, struggling to justify the societal trade offs that are being made here. The first lockdown made sense as this was seen as potentially devastating. The wider impacts, IMHO, now outweigh the medical implications of those who catch it. What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. " How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? No lock them up in care homes to die there is that what you want ??"Absolutely not, tis the way they've done it thus far. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. " So explain to me what the point is of saying what the average age of someone who does from covid is? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. " People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction " You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 I hadn’t realised the average life expectancy in the UK was 81 and that does put the average COVID life expectancy into clear contrast. I do think that the secondary medical impacts (cancer and many other treatments that are being delayed) are only going to get increasingly large and the knock on impacts on education etc are going to have substantial ramifications through multiple generations. I am, increasingly, struggling to justify the societal trade offs that are being made here. The first lockdown made sense as this was seen as potentially devastating. The wider impacts, IMHO, now outweigh the medical implications of those who catch it. What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity." Lots are off self isolating or have coronavirus, the bame population is very vulnerable as well and they make up a big proportion of the nhs  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." Read about Caroline Coster a teacher who had her hands and feet amputated due to covid-19 complications that should make some sense hopefully about why we are trying to slow it down with face coverings | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts." We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. " I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 " I can only speak for some people I know at this end of the country, but they have been diagnosed and received treatment (& ongoing treatment) since the lockdown in March. There may well be done screening that hasn't occurred that I'm not aware of, but to be fair a lot of our medical centres are still working as normally as can be expected. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 I can only speak for some people I know at this end of the country, but they have been diagnosed and received treatment (& ongoing treatment) since the lockdown in March. There may well be done screening that hasn't occurred that I'm not aware of, but to be fair a lot of our medical centres are still working as normally as can be expected." By the sounds of it..it depends where you live. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both?" I expect a decent government that provides the required amount of doctors and nurses. Send in the army medics if they have too. Two groups of people dying infront of you, one is not more important than another just because it is more topical. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both? I expect a decent government that provides the required amount of doctors and nurses. Send in the army medics if they have too. Two groups of people dying infront of you, one is not more important than another just because it is more topical. " I agree with your 1st sentence but that isnt happening. That didn't answer my question though..we dont have the resources to deal with both. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 I can only speak for some people I know at this end of the country, but they have been diagnosed and received treatment (& ongoing treatment) since the lockdown in March. There may well be done screening that hasn't occurred that I'm not aware of, but to be fair a lot of our medical centres are still working as normally as can be expected. By the sounds of it..it depends where you live." That could be true. Many of the medical clinics also seem to be working (eye, ears etc) and others who have needed to go to a&e for treatment/examination have managed without to much difficulty (think they were triaged over the phone). NHS dentistry is still lagging behind as I believe there is only emergency treatments available, which tends to be extraction rather than filling/crown etc. Private dentists working as normal with covid restrictions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both? I expect a decent government that provides the required amount of doctors and nurses. Send in the army medics if they have too. Two groups of people dying infront of you, one is not more important than another just because it is more topical. I agree with your 1st sentence but that isnt happening. That didn't answer my question though..we dont have the resources to deal with both." So the answer is find the resources dont just leave other people to die | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though." I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both? I expect a decent government that provides the required amount of doctors and nurses. Send in the army medics if they have too. Two groups of people dying infront of you, one is not more important than another just because it is more topical. I agree with your 1st sentence but that isnt happening. That didn't answer my question though..we dont have the resources to deal with both. So the answer is find the resources dont just leave other people to die " I'm keep quiet as that is getting into politics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. " So what should they do? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." Homework Update . . . So far in the UK over 43 thousand deaths have taken place. Asian Flu killed around 33,000 in the United Kingdom were attributed to the 1957–58 flu outbreak. The population of the UK was 51,495,702 1957. We now have 16,390,309 more people and Social Mobility is much higher now than it ever was in 1957. A vaccine was available in October 1957 which was only 1 month after the virus was first detected. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"According to BBC today covid 5 to 25 times deadlier than flu....most folk are fine but for some it’s a terrible disease. We have a friend barely 60 who’s desperately ill and caught it from her kids. Totally get the frustration so many feel re the restrictions on daily life but do we really want to go down the survival of the fittest route? We’re just hoping above hope for a vaccine or even the treatment that allows us to be reunited with loved ones...watch live sport and arts again...stops bame people dying disproportionately and prevents young people having to be confined and losing their jobs and education...and lets us return to having some sexy fun again. Right now it’s shit whatever happens "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. So what should they do?" Prioritise the young over the elderly rather than the other way round? More a question than a statement | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. So what should they do? Prioritise the young over the elderly rather than the other way round? More a question than a statement " That's what I'm asking but people seemed prepared to hint it .but not say it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. So what should they do? Prioritise the young over the elderly rather than the other way round? More a question than a statement " Given that the younger generations are going to be the ones facing it in the years to come then that's probably the best idea.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. So what should they do?" That is the Billion dollar question isn't it... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That the average age of the people dying of covid is 82.4 years old. Stating a statistic doesn't mean suggesting leaving anybody to die. People make things up to suit there agenda , but the above ages are fact not fiction You said people are missing vital treatments You said the average age of someone dying from covid is 81 So explain to me your point between those 2 facts. We never said the average of Covid deaths was 81 we said it’s 82.4 81 is the average lifespan in U.K. I'll ask again You said people were missing vital treatments. You then said the average age of people dying was 81. I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,but the only interpretation I can take from that, is why are prople missing treatments to save the lives of people near end of life Happy to be corrected though. I'd say that pretty much sums it up yes, many younger fitter people are being left to die of other conditions over a longer period of time due to lack of treatment to try and save older people in generally poorer health from covid-19. That is the simple fact that is going on right with our NHS. So what should they do? That is the Billion dollar question isn't it... " Probally not cutting every service to the bone would be start. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it. Read about Caroline Coster a teacher who had her hands and feet amputated due to covid-19 complications that should make some sense hopefully about why we are trying to slow it down with face coverings " Fully understandable and very sad that it happens, but there are other illnesses that can cause the same. Diabetics for example can lose feet and legs, and the diabetic treatment and support has been drastically reduced in our area. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should resource our health service appropriately, to treat the known problems that we have, as well as the predictable epidemics that we can face and that we run test simulations for. Flu is largely treatable and preventable. New flu vaccines are under trials at present, similar to the covid-19 vaccines, that would protect against all strains of flu, making it a much less deadly virus. We follow the science as we continue to learn and develop better treatments. Flu is generally much less of a problem than this current pandemic virus. Look at the recent UK flu deaths, including pneumonia. It's less infectious generally too. Totally different problem. " Good news if they can make flu less deadly, but it still does cause massive winter problems for hospitals. Pre covid we seemed to have hospitals at breaking point every winter from flu, or certainly always reported in the media as such people being turned away,treated in corridors. I dont think the predicted nhs crisis from covid is a new problem | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" So what should they do? That is the Billion dollar question isn't it... Probally not cutting every service to the bone would be start." Very true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"0.01% of 100000 = 10 " Said that earlier on. So the figures in the original post don't add up! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I know 6 people who have caught it, age range 40 to 55. One ended up in intensive care for 2 weeks. 3 self isolated, self treated and now have symptoms of long covid. 2 self isolated, self treated and seem to have fully recovered after a couple of tough days. None of the above appeal to me!" * How many of the 4 who got ill had underlying health conditions or were overweight or obese ? You don't say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? No lock them up in care homes to die there "How about we lock you up in a care home insensitive. Better not say it or get a ban. Shocking | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should resource our health service appropriately, to treat the known problems that we have, as well as the predictable epidemics that we can face and that we run test simulations for. Flu is largely treatable and preventable. New flu vaccines are under trials at present, similar to the covid-19 vaccines, that would protect against all strains of flu, making it a much less deadly virus. We follow the science as we continue to learn and develop better treatments. Flu is generally much less of a problem than this current pandemic virus. Look at the recent UK flu deaths, including pneumonia. It's less infectious generally too. Totally different problem. Good news if they can make flu less deadly, but it still does cause massive winter problems for hospitals. Pre covid we seemed to have hospitals at breaking point every winter from flu, or certainly always reported in the media as such people being turned away,treated in corridors. I dont think the predicted nhs crisis from covid is a new problem "“...... Good news if they can make flu less deadly, but it still does cause massive winter problems for hospitals...” ——————————- And if flu creates winter problems for hospitals, then imagine the hospitals having to deal with both flu & covid. All the more reason to curb the spread of covid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both?" How can you expect someone from Fab to answer that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? No lock them up in care homes to die there
How about we lock you up in a care home insensitive. Better not say it or get a ban. Shocking "oh dear clearly someone doesn't get sarcasm | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity." Because we don’t have the staff, forget the space, equipment etc, an icu treating serious COVID patients needs consultants, radiologist, surgical backup, nurses with experience of the 1-1 care patients will continually need. This has always been the issue, to expand space even within a standard hospital you have to draft in specialists to cover the numbers from other services. If you need additional space, you have to lose ability in other services. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Because we don’t have the staff, forget the space, equipment etc, an icu treating serious COVID patients needs consultants, radiologist, surgical backup, nurses with experience of the 1-1 care patients will continually need. This has always been the issue, to expand space even within a standard hospital you have to draft in specialists to cover the numbers from other services. If you need additional space, you have to lose ability in other services." Why is it that people find this so difficult to grasp? The NHS is understaffed by over 100,000 people, that is the level required to safely staff hospitals when there is no pandemic. Now we have a huge global pandemic and people think there are enough staff for thousands of extra beds. In 2010 we had the most efficient health service in the world but it has been cut to the bone since, no pay rises for almost a decade and insufficient investment means there just isn’t the capacity to cope. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Because we don’t have the staff, forget the space, equipment etc, an icu treating serious COVID patients needs consultants, radiologist, surgical backup, nurses with experience of the 1-1 care patients will continually need. This has always been the issue, to expand space even within a standard hospital you have to draft in specialists to cover the numbers from other services. If you need additional space, you have to lose ability in other services. Why is it that people find this so difficult to grasp? The NHS is understaffed by over 100,000 people, that is the level required to safely staff hospitals when there is no pandemic. Now we have a huge global pandemic and people think there are enough staff for thousands of extra beds. In 2010 we had the most efficient health service in the world but it has been cut to the bone since, no pay rises for almost a decade and insufficient investment means there just isn’t the capacity to cope." It’s no longer lucrative for people to work in the NHS. No incentive, just hard work and no appreciation. If I was a school leaver there is no way I would want to train in the medical field. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Because we don’t have the staff, forget the space, equipment etc, an icu treating serious COVID patients needs consultants, radiologist, surgical backup, nurses with experience of the 1-1 care patients will continually need. This has always been the issue, to expand space even within a standard hospital you have to draft in specialists to cover the numbers from other services. If you need additional space, you have to lose ability in other services. Why is it that people find this so difficult to grasp? The NHS is understaffed by over 100,000 people, that is the level required to safely staff hospitals when there is no pandemic. Now we have a huge global pandemic and people think there are enough staff for thousands of extra beds. In 2010 we had the most efficient health service in the world but it has been cut to the bone since, no pay rises for almost a decade and insufficient investment means there just isn’t the capacity to cope. It’s no longer lucrative for people to work in the NHS. No incentive, just hard work and no appreciation. If I was a school leaver there is no way I would want to train in the medical field. " No you are right far better to sign on or work on a shop till if you push it.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 This is more what I cant get my head round, the stopping of needed treatments, surely that is against everything that doctors and hospitals are there for. How do you propose an overstretched NHS deals with both? How can you expect someone from Fab to answer that? " I'm sorry. Do you need a degree in politics and economics to form an opinion? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." I think your maths is way way out !! Please check that (Btw this isn't flu??)  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it. I think your maths is way way out !! Please check that (Btw this isn't flu??) "PS that equates to 0.1 and 0.3 % But it's still incorrect | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 " Are you related to a doctor ? Shipman maybe ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: ...in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year." If you're gonna play amateur epidemiologist at least get your cut and pastes right. Asian flu was 1957, Hong Kong Flu was 1968. And HK flu killed an estimated 1 million people worldwide, 100,000 in the US alone. (CDC figures). Covid 19 deaths have surpassed that level globally in less than 12 months. Does the comments in this forum remind anyone else of 9/11, with all the online experts posting complex theories involving the burning temperature of aviation fuel versus the melting temperature of construction steel, when none of them had any knowledge or expertise or even the first frikkin clue what they were talking about.* *Not aimed the OP, but every expert on here. Perhaps folks could point out their professional qualifications and experience before posting their stats and theories? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: ...in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. If you're gonna play amateur epidemiologist at least get your cut and pastes right. Asian flu was 1957, Hong Kong Flu was 1968. And HK flu killed an estimated 1 million people worldwide, 100,000 in the US alone. (CDC figures). Covid 19 deaths have surpassed that level globally in less than 12 months. Does the comments in this forum remind anyone else of 9/11, with all the online experts posting complex theories involving the burning temperature of aviation fuel versus the melting temperature of construction steel, when none of them had any knowledge or expertise or even the first frikkin clue what they were talking about.* *Not aimed the OP, but every expert on here. Perhaps folks could point out their professional qualifications and experience before posting their stats and theories? " That's a good idea rather than searching the internet for wrong / dubious figures. I have limited knowledge of stats etc but I have been a nurse for 30 years (icu 10 yr) and any reference to flu is simply ridiculous and shows those quoting flu being a bigger threat is simply misguided | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: ...in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. If you're gonna play amateur epidemiologist at least get your cut and pastes right. Asian flu was 1957, Hong Kong Flu was 1968. And HK flu killed an estimated 1 million people worldwide, 100,000 in the US alone. (CDC figures). Covid 19 deaths have surpassed that level globally in less than 12 months. Does the comments in this forum remind anyone else of 9/11, with all the online experts posting complex theories involving the burning temperature of aviation fuel versus the melting temperature of construction steel, when none of them had any knowledge or expertise or even the first frikkin clue what they were talking about.* *Not aimed the OP, but every expert on here. Perhaps folks could point out their professional qualifications and experience before posting their stats and theories? " Or just say where they got them from? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 I hadn’t realised the average life expectancy in the UK was 81 and that does put the average COVID life expectancy into clear contrast. I do think that the secondary medical impacts (cancer and many other treatments that are being delayed) are only going to get increasingly large and the knock on impacts on education etc are going to have substantial ramifications through multiple generations. I am, increasingly, struggling to justify the societal trade offs that are being made here. The first lockdown made sense as this was seen as potentially devastating. The wider impacts, IMHO, now outweigh the medical implications of those who catch it. What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Lots are off self isolating or have coronavirus, the bame population is very vulnerable as well and they make up a big proportion of the nhs "I am not denying they make up an big proportion of the NHS. What I am saying is that a much larger proportion of NHS activity is not taking place and that worries me. The death rates from cancer treatments that have not taken place or even identified are going to be high. That will impact all parts of society including the BAME groups you cite. Cancer does not care about your ethnic identity. Same with many other non COVID illnesses. People who die from non treated cancer growths will have died as a result of COVID. But needlessly so. What I am saying is that I am struggling to reconcile the focus on COVID over all over activity. Medical or otherwise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Because we don’t have the staff, forget the space, equipment etc, an icu treating serious COVID patients needs consultants, radiologist, surgical backup, nurses with experience of the 1-1 care patients will continually need. This has always been the issue, to expand space even within a standard hospital you have to draft in specialists to cover the numbers from other services. If you need additional space, you have to lose ability in other services." Which is what I cited as an assumption  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 I hadn’t realised the average life expectancy in the UK was 81 and that does put the average COVID life expectancy into clear contrast. I do think that the secondary medical impacts (cancer and many other treatments that are being delayed) are only going to get increasingly large and the knock on impacts on education etc are going to have substantial ramifications through multiple generations. I am, increasingly, struggling to justify the societal trade offs that are being made here. The first lockdown made sense as this was seen as potentially devastating. The wider impacts, IMHO, now outweigh the medical implications of those who catch it. What I don’t understand is why, if there is a concern on the NHS, all COVID patients are not treated in Nightingale hospitals and the core NHS left for the wider community. I can only assume it is due to staff capacity. Lots are off self isolating or have coronavirus, the bame population is very vulnerable as well and they make up a big proportion of the nhs
I am not denying they make up an big proportion of the NHS. What I am saying is that a much larger proportion of NHS activity
is not taking place and that worries me. The death rates from cancer treatments that have not taken place or even identified are going to be high. That will impact all parts of society including the BAME groups you cite. Cancer does not care about your ethnic identity. Same with many other non COVID illnesses.
People who die from non treated cancer growths will have died as a result of COVID. But needlessly so.
What I am saying is that I am struggling to reconcile the focus on COVID over all over activity. Medical or otherwise.
"I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources "I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated? Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446 All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter."So we are faced with priorities and the COVID patients are entering our hospital atm in an emergency situation, can you see a solution other than delay other patients ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter."I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort. The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?"Exactly! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?
Exactly! "Which is actually exactly what I said - there is not enough resource - so we are all in wonderful agreement
Given it can’t be expected to deal with both issues which do you deprioritise? Cancer or COVID? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?
Exactly!
Which is actually exactly what I said - there is not enough resource - so we are all in wonderful agreement
Given it can’t be expected to deal with both issues which do you deprioritise? Cancer or COVID?"At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?
Exactly!
Which is actually exactly what I said - there is not enough resource - so we are all in wonderful agreement
Given it can’t be expected to deal with both issues which do you deprioritise? Cancer or COVID?
At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence.
"You personally agree with that decision? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?
Exactly!
Which is actually exactly what I said - there is not enough resource - so we are all in wonderful agreement
Given it can’t be expected to deal with both issues which do you deprioritise? Cancer or COVID?
At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence.
You personally agree with that decision? "I can understand the thinking behind it. If we ignore it and it ravages through the population, the hospitals will get battered and..fuck knows what will happen. From what I've read..certain areas are prioritising other cases..I don't think they are ignoring other people who have things like cancer..but it obviously depends where you live. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence. You personally agree with that decision? I can understand the thinking behind it. If we ignore it and it ravages through the population, the hospitals will get battered and..fuck knows what will happen. From what I've read..certain areas are prioritising other cases..I don't think they are ignoring other people who have things like cancer..but it obviously depends where you live." I think we have a pretty good idea of what will happen. We know the COVID mortality rates for various age ranges of the population and we know what happens to groups with comorbidities. We also know what will happen to other medical conditions if not treated or treated/identified late/at a reduced rate. COVID will result in a large number of excess deaths, particularly in those with a number of comorbidities. I don’t believe that is questioned. Prioritising COVID treatments over other conditions will also result in a large number of excess deaths of those untreated conditions albeit at a later date and likely out of sight. I don’t believe that is questioned either. People are going to die either way. Do you trade future deaths for current ones? That is why I asked you if you were comfortable with the trade off decisions that have been taken. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter.
I'm not sure anyone has said anything of the sort.
The nhs..like everything else .has been stripped to the bone.. so can it be expected to deal with both issues?
Exactly!
Which is actually exactly what I said - there is not enough resource - so we are all in wonderful agreement
Given it can’t be expected to deal with both issues which do you deprioritise? Cancer or COVID?
At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence.
You personally agree with that decision? "We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"At the moment it has been decided that a global pandemic which could easily overrun the entire system,takes precedence. You personally agree with that decision? I can understand the thinking behind it. If we ignore it and it ravages through the population, the hospitals will get battered and..fuck knows what will happen. From what I've read..certain areas are prioritising other cases..I don't think they are ignoring other people who have things like cancer..but it obviously depends where you live. I think we have a pretty good idea of what will happen. We know the COVID mortality rates for various age ranges of the population and we know what happens to groups with comorbidities. We also know what will happen to other medical conditions if not treated or treated/identified late/at a reduced rate. COVID will result in a large number of excess deaths, particularly in those with a number of comorbidities. I don’t believe that is questioned. Prioritising COVID treatments over other conditions will also result in a large number of excess deaths of those untreated conditions albeit at a later date and likely out of sight. I don’t believe that is questioned either. People are going to die either way. Do you trade future deaths for current ones? That is why I asked you if you were comfortable with the trade off decisions that have been taken. " Basically from what I see in my hospital / trust is that anyone needing emergency treatments or any emergency type intervention is getting it . Longer term treatments are getting postponed. It's awful not having had the necessary investment over the past 10 years but that's the price paid for people voting to enable to keep their taxes lower . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but ...." It is not true that we are not faced with a choice as you actually observe at the end of your point. I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. Your point about tax allocation in your previous point is valid and will always be the case. Therefore we will always need to prioritise. We can’t hide from that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die?" Happily most over 80 year olds who catch it won't die so why would it mean that?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but .... It is not true that we are not faced with a choice as you actually observe at the end of your point. I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. Your point about tax allocation in your previous point is valid and will always be the case. Therefore we will always need to prioritise. We can’t hide from that. " No you are incorrect. Emergency type treatment is being given no matter what the disease . It's been the same for the whole of 2020 . If hospitals ever do get inundated then some emergency treatments will get comprised but I have certainly not seen or heard of that happening anywhere yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but .... It is not true that we are not faced with a choice as you actually observe at the end of your point. I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. Your point about tax allocation in your previous point is valid and will always be the case. Therefore we will always need to prioritise. We can’t hide from that. " What has happened so far is generally some cases have gone through another triage process. If the doctor and/or specialist that a patient has been referred to feels the treatment can be postponed or delayed then it is prioritised in that way . I have not seen ANY emergency treatments not given . Its not ideal but there are finite staff and resources and really tough decisions are sometimes taken . All I know as a nurse of 30 years is if we get over run it would be carnage | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but .... It is not true that we are not faced with a choice as you actually observe at the end of your point. I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. Your point about tax allocation in your previous point is valid and will always be the case. Therefore we will always need to prioritise. We can’t hide from that. What has happened so far is generally some cases have gone through another triage process. If the doctor and/or specialist that a patient has been referred to feels the treatment can be postponed or delayed then it is prioritised in that way . I have not seen ANY emergency treatments not given . Its not ideal but there are finite staff and resources and really tough decisions are sometimes taken . All I know as a nurse of 30 years is if we get over run it would be carnage " So indeed there is no choice . The patient in what is very often in an "emergency " type situation will quite rightly get priority not matter what the illness Covid or other | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet!" Er, 1000 out of 100,000 is 1% | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We are faced with no choice . It's an emergency situation that needs instant intervention in hospital . What else can a hospital do if Covid patients come to hospital? They have to receive treatment instantly.... it's a heart breaking choice cancelling other more long term treatments but .... It is not true that we are not faced with a choice as you actually observe at the end of your point. I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. Your point about tax allocation in your previous point is valid and will always be the case. Therefore we will always need to prioritise. We can’t hide from that. What has happened so far is generally some cases have gone through another triage process. If the doctor and/or specialist that a patient has been referred to feels the treatment can be postponed or delayed then it is prioritised in that way . I have not seen ANY emergency treatments not given . Its not ideal but there are finite staff and resources and really tough decisions are sometimes taken . All I know as a nurse of 30 years is if we get over run it would be carnage "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus all the cancer suffers abandoned, one in the paper today 31 stopped her treatment in March due to Covid , remind me again average age of Covid death 82.4 average lifespan 81 So if you are over 80..we just leave them to die? Happily most over 80 year olds who catch it won't die so why would it mean that??" I've asked that but didnt get a reply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." You do realise that 1,000 per 100,000 would be 1% not 0.01% ... don't you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. No you are incorrect. Emergency type treatment is being given no matter what the disease . It's been the same for the whole of 2020 . If hospitals ever do get inundated then some emergency treatments will get comprised but I have certainly not seen or heard of that happening anywhere yet. "I did not say that emergency treatment was compromised. I explicitly said it was being carried out and that I understood that. Please stop misrepresenting my words. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I completely understand people need treatment now. As do patients with a multitude of other issues. Let’s just be clear that we are making an active choice to prioritise immediate treatment for one group and not others. No you are incorrect. Emergency type treatment is being given no matter what the disease . It's been the same for the whole of 2020 . If hospitals ever do get inundated then some emergency treatments will get comprised but I have certainly not seen or heard of that happening anywhere yet.
I did not say that emergency treatment was compromised. I explicitly said it was being carried out and that I understood that. Please stop misrepresenting my words. "No misreprepresing here. I am trying to let you know that your statement: Prioritising COVID treatments over other conditions is misleading. The priority is for any emergency medical condition over others that are not deemed to be emergency. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter."Part of the issue here is that it’s just not safe to allow cancer patients anywhere near areas where they might catch Covid19. I work for a trust that has not stopped cancer treatments such as chemo and radio therapies but had to stop urgent cancer operations for a couple of weeks because there weren’t the ITU beds to put the patients in afterwards. We have been able to do this because the staff in the oncology team volunteered to stay in complete lockdown the entire time since it first began. Given the whining that people do on here because they have to wear a mask to the shops that is quite the sacrifice. Treating patients in the same building as there is an incredibly infectious virus is very dangerous. Moving staff from one area to another to help look after patients causes issues around staffing and infection control so we in the NHS are doing what is necessary, stopping the people who are about to die from dying. In some areas this has meant that some people who may have survived with earlier intervention are going to die. It’s a horrendous situation but one the country chose for itself by voting Conservative. People need to understand that if they want a health service that can cope with all they need it to then they need to stop voting for a party that is ideologically opposed to it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I know 6 people who have caught it, age range 40 to 55. One ended up in intensive care for 2 weeks. 3 self isolated, self treated and now have symptoms of long covid. 2 self isolated, self treated and seem to have fully recovered after a couple of tough days. None of the above appeal to me! * How many of the 4 who got ill had underlying health conditions or were overweight or obese ? You don't say." This is awful! Rather than saying I'm sorry people know have suffered you want to know their medical history  so if they had an understanding condition or are overweight it doesn't matter? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." Huge glaring admission.... How many people get tested and documented with a flu diagnosis? I’ll give you a clue, only those who are hospitalised with the most serious medical issue with flu are tested and documented. So... if you want to take a rough comparison based purely on covid-19 cases admitted to hospital it would read about 20,000 for covid-19 using the same circumstances. In short... utter bobbins, put the figures into context and don’t discount the hundreds of 1000’s of flu patients who suffer in silence with a lemsip and a duvet. #pandemicfacts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it. Read about Caroline Coster a teacher who had her hands and feet amputated due to covid-19 complications that should make some sense hopefully about why we are trying to slow it down with face coverings " Cases are increasing, Apparantly, with face coverings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So our pandemic facts: Since January 2020. Covid 19. 0.01% die per 100.000, that’s a 1000 people per hundred thousand, no vaccine as yet! Influenza. 0.03% die per 100.000, that’s 3000 per hundred thousand, with a vaccine. For those old enough, in 1968, Asian flu killed 100.000 in a less than a year. I follow our guidance from government and scientists, but I wonder if it’s needed? I very nearly lost a friend of 44 to covid, 4 weeks in intensive care but it’s the only case I’ve actually seen and when you look at those figures which is fact, we never had all this mask and lockdown business with influenza and it’s still the bigger killer to this day. I don’t get it." sorry there's no polite way to say this but youre figures are pure fantasy, shite if you will. you cant include people who havent even caught the fkn virus as having "survived" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I cannot see why you say needlessly? We only have a set number of hospitals/ doctors / nurses etc how do you propose we treat a large amount of additional patients all needing intervention? We cannot miraculously find e train resources
I 100% agree there is a lack of resources and capacity. There always will be. The question is, as you say, where does that scarce resource get allocated?
Because there is not enough resource, wherever we allocate it, people will die. Cancer treatment has been hit hard because of COVID resource decisions and as a result people who could have been saved won’t be. Source:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52985446
All I am saying is that we need a sense of proportion on COVID as other factors cannot be ignored. Unless of course people feel that cancer does not matter."Isnt the whole point of treating C-19 so seriously to allow the NHS to function? If C-19 is allowed to develop unchecked then every hospital bed would be C-19. Large portions of NHS staff would also have C-19. Plus allowing uncontrolled growth would ultimately lead to mutation after mutation. We already have some mutations and a few cases of multiple contraction. No restriction would multiply the risks. The chances of having an effective vaccine so quickly under uncontrolled mutation has to be reduced surely? I am not an expert but uncontrolled spread with numerous mutations seems to be best avoided. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For all the damnation and scorn put on us Brits by many of the fab experts on here, we're actually doing better than our hot tempered cousins over the Channel which is rather perverse don't you think. With 80,000 + infection on saturday it was nearly 4 x more than here. Seems very strange. I think most of us Brits are staying calm, largely getting on with it and trying not to let our tempers boil over. Let's hope things stay that way eh "Sadly we are about 4 weeks behind them on the infections surge, let’s wait and see where we get too x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
