What's your beef with the WHO btw? _____________________________ China have used WHO to mislead the world from the very start of this crisis. The WHO is either complicit or dangerously incompetent China also refused the WHO’s request to send a team of scientific observers to Hubei province, the centre of the outbreak. Two days later, they praised Chinese efforts to contain the disease. The government of Taiwan claimed that the WHO had ignored its own early reports of human-to-human transmission of coronavirus as part of a larger history of appeasing China – which has blocked Taiwan from joining the WHO (and the UN) for decades. The World Health Organisation act more like FIFA, than a body with the publics best interest at heart. Well worth delving into some articles for your own take on it. But me, I'm not happy at all.
This from a Guardian article, https://www.theguardian.com/comment...myVynkQllMiiDg6aEN6u2AoOeE#Echobox=1586615917 NICE I think not. "The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) was forced to make a U-turn last week on their advice for the NHS to deny disabled people treatment, but only after disability groups threatened legal action. Nice had told doctors they should assess patients with conditions such as learning disabilities and autism as scoring high for “frailty” - thereby meeting criteria to be refused treatment - based on the fact they need support with personal care in their day-to-day life".
I don’t know what to say. They are still someone’s loved one. Good god, who would be a doctor, having to make these sort of decisions, when there aren’t enough ventilators to go around.
That is one of the most appalling things I have ever heard of Jabbo. I bet none of those arseholes making up such evil policies at NICE have disabled children or relatives. They had better keep their identities well hidden because if I found out who they were I would take a ****ing baseball bat to them. What a bunch of cold hearted cowards they are to sit in an office somewhere, deciding what value someone's life has. I very much doubt any doctor or nurse would have accepted that 'advice'. NICE - National Institute for Callous Extermination. Welcome to SS GB.
Calm down mate, it's in a paper and may be false or made worse than it was. It wouldn't be the first time stuff was reported out of context, would it? The article says the NHS has to prioritise in some situations, not out and out **** the disabled people. You could say that about anyone not being a priority, there was one woman and its tragic, her husband has MND and he just died of this, others may have been prioritised over someone more healthy eith greater chance of living longer. It's an unimaginable decision to have to make, but possibly the correct one. Threatening to take a baseball bat to someone is pretty stupid, and I'm sure you dont mean that. One Q for the forum, if you can only save 1 life out of 2 people in front if you, one disabled and the other not, who would you save, or would you save no one? I'm not saying which way I'd go, so please dont read into something that's not there...
Impossible to answer for me. Every life is as important as another - being 'able' to do stuff doesn't make your life more important than another. Stephen Hawkin - that is all.
Yeah, unfortunately when resources are limited - and resources are always limited - someone has to make these extremely tough calls. I doubt it’s ever a question of deciding whose life has most value, more a matter of deciding who has the best chance of responding well to treatment when there isn’t enough of anything - equipment, trained staff, beds - to go round.
These arguments are so old. The nhs is on a continuum between life saving and life enhancing, and you can make ethical arguments to support medical opinion being central to decisions that reflect that continuum and the dilemmas that arise. What N.I.C.E. shouldn't do is judge what is essentially whether any 'disabilities' contribute to how that decision is made. There are dilemmas: My mother was 7 years into dementia, unable to recognise anyone she loved, 97 years old, the classic issue arose because she lost the ability of how to swallow, therefore sooner or later food would enter her lungs leading to pneumonia. Time for antibiotics or time to die? I played God.... N.I.C.E. should never..
Hi Ritchie, I am still in China, remained here throughout the crisis. As far as I can tell, there has not been any evidence of large scale manufacturing of numbers to keep the figures low here in China. On my phone I can look up to see the figures for the province I live in at a moments notice, this is not from an official site but through wechat, the largest app used here and available to people overseas. In this province the figure showing today is 936 were infected, one death and 935 have recovered. There have been no new cases here in this province for a few weeks now. In the northeast of China a new batch of infected cases was reported last week, all originating from Russia, a country with relatively low figures having been released. I lived in Wuhan for five years until last summer, I have lots of friends in that city and none of the people I know living there had any of their family members contract the virus. Though some said there were reports of some sick people living close by. I have read reports originating from unofficial sources overseas allegedly quoting people from Wuhan that say up to 40,000 have died in the city, that is absolute nonsense, there is no evidence of that level of deaths. I get the impression some people are so biased in their thinking that they will believe whatever they are told and disregard the evidence. I am very concerned at the way it has been handled in the UK. They had the time to put measures in place and ignored the warnings until it was too late, apologies if that comment is bringing politics into the discussion, but difficult to avoid it at this time.
I am afraid there is a lot of exaggeration going on from the press and individuals. We had 900 odd die yesterday....of Convid 19 All in hospital. All had the disease true although they died with it not necessarily of it.
