It will be her choice, she is bloody minded enough and values the company enough to risk it anyway, but I suspect she would stay at home (she’s totally independent but has a flat in a retirement development in Moreton in the Marsh, so there are plenty of other people around). Last year, before LFTs were widely available and when we were not supposed to mix at Christmas, she had Christmas with us anyway, against the rules, rebels that we are. We reckoned that her mental health was a bigger risk than the virus at that time, and we were very careful for the couple of weeks beforehand - including my kids, both in their 20s, avoiding socialising, which is a big and unfair ask.
Very true. It is very difficult to have a grown up discussion about the NHS and possible reforms without people becoming hysterical unfortunately.
Some obese people don't get a choice, there's a myriad of reasons that people can get fat. No such excuse for not getting jabbed, just ignorance and selfishness !
If they don't have an underlying health reason for not having the jabs then yes I would, I'd prefer to give treatment to cancer patients who are having their treatments stopped and who don't have a choice. There's no valid excuse for not having all the jabs if you don't have a valid underlying health condition that it might affect, so why should they receive treatment from a struggling NHS ?
Hey, let’s do a hypothetical! The moral maze! There is no policy in place in Hospital X. ITU has one place left in it. You can use it for an non COVID case of a young mother with sepsis developed from a cut received while decorating her Christmas tree. Or for a young mother who needs ventilation, because she is entering a cytokine storm prompted by COVID, and is unvaccinated. Neither are strong enough to be transferred elsewhere, both will die without intensive care. Who do you admit? From a purely personal perspective - you treat the one most likely to survive - if this is equal first come first served - if this leads to the unvaccinated lady getting treated, you bloody well make sure she knows at what cost to others. If she survives. Who would be an ITU consultant?
Hey, I suspect that goes on all the time. It should always be first come, first served in the first instance - how do you know what’s coming next? - but we all know that prioritisation goes on thereafter. Who wouldn’t argue that a small child’s life is more valuable than that of a frail octogenarian with dementia, for example, particularly if resources are scant? So, you’d send the recovered unjabbed lady back into the big bad world with a flea in her ear? Cool. How about the teenager hit by a car whilst playing ‘chicken’ and the Young Conservative struck down by leukaemia? Fun game, this.
Like I said before, the bloody NHS is always struggling. It’s struggled before. It’s struggling now and it’ll be struggling long after this bollocks is consigned to history. Sorry state of affairs that we choose to discriminate in this way.
The NHS immediately began to discriminate because of the cult of covid. People have been denied a cancer or heart disease diagnosis or treatment whilst people with covid have been prioritised.
That’s what I’d do, is your response first come first served? Of course rationing goes on continuously in the NHS, regardless of pandemics, a demand control mechanism (nobody, apart from a few loonies, pretends that supply side economics aka voodoo economics, applies to healthcare), that’s what a waiting list is. When it comes to these live or die issues it’s the poor old doctor who has to make a call, with no publicly shared criteria that I am aware of. Once you have set and shared your criteria the game ends, no point setting other scenarios unless your criteria are based on some kind of imposed moral judgement, which I don’t think mine (likelihood of survival/first come) are.
Is that not the same thing mate? Sorry i didn't get round to answering your question the other day. If there was a jab that made me indestructible to injuries of course i would take it. So on the whole do we agree obese people do that **** to themselves and should be put to the back of the queue for NHS treatment? ditto alcoholics, smokers, sports players. Whilst we are there as uber says, lets do it by age too
See, that's where the argument falls down IMO. Anti-Vaxxers aren't just doing it to themselves though, are they - by not getting vaccinated they are potentially carrying round heavier viral loads than those who are vaccinated, with a chnnce of infecting those who are most vulnerable thus perpetuating this never ending cycle, possibly opening up the door to more and more variants. The only way out of this is vaccination - follow the science! Smokers have far less chance of causing passive lung cancer to others as we now have a smoking ban - so if you want to smoke, you either do it on your own property or smoke outside of a public premises. Isn't that kinda similar to what the Covid passport is asking of you? You make your choice, and act accordingly, no big song and dance about it Breach a smoking ban and you get fined. Get pissed and smash up the local off-sales - fine, possibly jail sentence. Get fat, and Channel 5 will make a documentary about you! No-one wants to see anyone deprived of critical care when they need it most, but people need to be accountable for their actions. First come first served, as is the case everywhere until you get to triage when the consultant then has the onerous task of choosing who lives - but after years of practice, you would hope that they make the right decision. Which one is a Chelsea fan?
